Skip to main content

Full text of "Politics, books 1-5; a rev. text, with introd., analysis and commentary by Franz Susemihl and R.D. Hicks"

See other formats


p Ff 












Uonfcon : 


\All Rights reservei?\ 


. _ 



(JTamfcrttige : 



IN the work, of which this volume is an instalment, I have 
undertaken to reproduce in an English dress Professor Susemihl s 
edition of the Politics in Greek and German as issued by him, 
with notes explanatory of the subject-matter, in 1879. It is not, 
however, a simple reproduction, but a minute and scrupulous 
revision, the translation having been dropped and the plan of 
the work sensibly modified to adapt it to the wants of English 
students. Some changes have been made in the Introduction, 
to which a section has been added, though naturally the mate 
rials of this section are by no means new. The text (for which 
Professor Susemihl is solely responsible) has been corrected in 
some hundreds of places, mostly to bring it into agreement with 
his later edition in the Teubner series, of which a nova impressio 
correctior was issued in 1894, only a few months ago. The great 
majority of the changes which distinguish the impressio of 1894 
from that of 1883 have, however, to be sought in the Corrigenda. 
By the simple device of a change of type it has been found possible 
to exhibit to the eye the effect of the numerous transpositions 
here recommended, and yet to retain the received order of 
the text for facility of reference. In the notes explanatory of 
the subject-matter bearing his signature Professor Susemihl has 
introduced comprehensive changes. No one therefore should be 
surprised if these notes fail to correspond in substance (as they 
correspond in appended number) to those of the German edition. 


Where it seemed expedient, they have been supplemented from 
my own collections. It can be said with truth that difficulties 
have never been shirked, numerous as they undoubtedly are. 
Wherever a note grew to an inordinate length or threatened to 
digress from the context, it has been relegated to an excursus. 

In compiling additional notes I have received the greatest 
stimulus and advantage from the writings and correspondence 
of my collaborator, whose patience and forbearance have not 
been exhausted in the long interval preceding publication. He 
has always been willing to lavish upon me every assistance from 
the stores of his erudition, and to aid me with the latest results 
of his experience and ripened judgment. Indeed, it is not too 
much to say that not only primarily, but in the additions of 
date subsequent to 1879 indirectly, this volume, and the Politics 
as a whole, owes far more to him than to all other sources put 
together. Next to him I am most indebted to Dr Henry Jack 
son, who has never failed to give me encouragement and assist 
ance, and in 1880 most kindly placed at my disposal a selection 
of valuable notes, critical and exegetical, which are published in 
the course of the volume with his signature. Moreover, as in 
private duty bound, I acknowledge that it is to the stimulus of 
his inspiring lectures that I, like Dr Postgate and Mr Welldon, 
owe my first interest in Aristotelian studies. I have naturally 
endeavoured to profit by the publications of recent years, so far 
as they bore upon my author, and I may especially mention the 
contributions to the Transactions of tJie Cambridge Philological 
Society and Journal of Philology by Dr Jackson, Professor 
Ridgeway, Dr Postgate and Professor J. Cook Wilson. I have 
taken the liberty of consulting any materials to which I had 
access, such as the marginalia of the late Richard Shilleto in the 
Cambridge University Library, and of the late Edward Meredith 
Cope in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge. In common 
with the publishers I deplore and apologise for the long delay 
between the announcement and the publication of this work, 
although this delay has enabled me to secure a collation of the 
oldest extant source of the text, the fragments of the Vatican 
palimpsest, and to incorporate in the Addenda the most import- 


ant of the references to the recently discovered Constitution of 
Athens. Thus supplemented the commentary will, it is hoped, 
be found more adequate than any of its predecessors to our 
existing materials and means of information. 

Some will be surprised that more attention has not been 
bestowed upon the superb Introduction or the full and lucid 
commentary upon Books I and II published by Mr W. L. 
Newman in 1887. The truth is that, at the time of its ap 
pearance the earlier part of this volume had been printed off, 
and the publishers did not see their way either to issue this part 
(pp. i 460) separately, as I personally should have preferred, 
or to incur the heavy expense of cancelling the printed sheets. 
Some valuable annotations of Mr Newman s, however, which 
I should have been glad to incorporate in the proper place, 
receive a brief recognition in the Addenda. 

I have further to add that I began to print before Professor 
Susemihl had collected into a permanent form his first set of 
Quaestiones Aristotcleae I VII, and that for greater clearness I 
refer to the invaluable pamphlet issued by him in 1886, in which 
the main results of the seven Quaestiones are combined, as 
Quaestiones criticae collcctae, although the last word collectae forms 
no part of the title proper. 

My best thanks are here duly tendered to my friends Mr 
William Wyse, late Professor of Greek in University College, 
London, for valuable suggestions and criticisms, and numerous 
additional references, particularly in all that bears upon Greek 
Antiquities ; Miss Alice Zimmern, author of Home Life of the 
Greeks, Mr Hartmann W. Just, sometime scholar of C. C. C., 
Oxford, and Mr H. J. Wolstenholme, for timely assistance in 
the laborious task of translating from the German ; further, to 
my brother-in-law, Mr T. L. Heath, formerly Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge, who read most of the earlier proof-sheets. 
Occasional notes of his and one by Mr H. W. Just bear the 
authors initials. To guard against all misapprehension I should 
add that the excursus on Greek Music was already printed off 
before the Provost of Oriel s recent work on that subject 
reached me. 

viii PREFACE. 

The want of an index, which renders this instalment of the 
work much less useful than it might otherwise have been, will 
be remedied when the remaining three books are published. 


Oct. 15, 1894. 


THE text of this edition with its double numbering of certain books, its double 
system of chapters and sections, and of marginal pages, may well perplex an unfamiliar 
reader unless a word or two be added as to the origin of this aggravated confusion and 
the various methods by which any given passage may be cited. 

The manuscripts exhibit the eight books in the old order, viz. ABFAEZH0 
according to the left heading of each page (not in the order of this edition which is 
A B T H 6 A Z E). There is no subdivision of the books in the Aldines and other 
early printed editions, any more than in the MSS. The Latin translations had been 
subdivided before this into chapters and sections, a division almost inevitable when 
the continuity of the text is disturbed by paraphrase and commentary. Thus the 
second edition of Victorius (Florence 1576) presents the text in a series of short 
sections, although these are never numbered or otherwise utilized for purposes of 

The system of chapters here adopted, as cited in the head lines and on the left 
hand of the pages of this volume, is that most widely known through its adoption by 
Immanuel Bekker in the great edition of the Berlin Academy (quarto 1831), and by 
Hermann Bonitz in the Index Aristotelictis to the same edition (1870). It may be 
traced back to the editions of Zwinger (1582), Sylburg (1587), Casaubon (1590). 
It seems that Zwinger merely modified another arrangement into chapters, derived 
from the Latin Aristotle (e.g. the edition of Bagolinus), and found in the third Basel 
edition (1550) of Conrad Gesner, also in Giphanius (1608). Sylburg (1587) and 
Conring (1656) give both schemes, calling Gesner s "vulgo." In this now obsolete 
arrangement Book I. made eight chapters, not thirteen, Book II., ten, not twelve, 
Book in., twelve, not eighteen. 

The sections into which Bekker s chapters are divided are taken from the Oxford 
reprint of Bekker in ten octavo volumes (1837), in which unfortunately Bekker s pages 
and lines are wholly ignored. These sections have been retained in this volume 
because Liddell and Scott s Greek Lexicon, and some other authorities, cite the 
Politics by them. They are numbered on the left side of the page with prefixed. 

The chapters (in Roman figures) and sections on the right side of the page are 
these introduced by J. Gottlob Schneider in his valuable edition of 1809. Schneider 
broke with all his predecessors by adopting longer chapters and fewer of them, e.g. 5 
in Book I., 9 in Book II. He was followed amongst subsequent editors by Gottling 



(1824^, Adolf Stahr (1839), Susemihl (1879) : Grote in his history always cites the 
Politics by Schneider s edition. 

But the tendency in modern times has been not to employ for citation either the 
sections of Bekker or the chapters and sections of Schneider, but rather the chapter, 
page, column, and line of the quarto of the Berlin Academy above mentioned. In 
this edition of all Aristotle the Politics occupies pages 1252 1342. The quarto 
volume is printed in double columns, cited as column a, column b. For example, 
1-252 a 18, 1276 b 4 (or in the Index Aristotelicus 1252*18, I2y6 b 4) are used to denote, 
the one, line 18 of the left column of page 1252, the other, line 4 of the right column of 
page 1276. The closer definition which this method of citation by lines secures is a 
great recommendation, but it is balanced by one drawback, viz. that to be quite sure 
of finding a passage the Berlin Aristotle is required, and after sixty years the 
supremacy of even this edition no longer remains unquestioned. In the present 
volume the pages and lines of Bekker s quarto are cited on the left hand side of the 
page, while in the heading over the right hand page the whole extent of the text on 
both left and right pages is recorded : (e.g. 1263 b 23 1264 a 4 for the text upon 
pp. 238 and 239 of this volume). 

Lastly, there are a few writers, Bernays and Oncken among them, who prefer to 
quote passages by the page and line, not of the Berlin quarto, but of the octavo 
reprint of it issued a little later, of which a third edition came out in 1855 and a 
fourth edition in 1878. For comparison, this system of pages has been recorded on 
the right hand margin, the reference being enclosed in a bracket, thus : (p. 31). 

For an example of these rival methods of citation take the sentence 5e? de ^de TOUTO 
ayvoeiv OTL XPV 7r/3ocre%etz/ TCJ TroXXy XP V V upon p. 239 of this edition. The reference 
(i) in the Index Aristotelicus would be 11/35, 1264 a i sq. ; we prefer to cite it as (ii) 
Book II, c. 5 16 (or n. 5. 16) by Bekker s chapters and sections : or dropping the 
book and chapter (which are really superfluous) as (iii) 1264 a i, 2 by Bekker s pages, 
columns and lines. No references in this English edition are given by Schneider s 
chapters and sections, which were followed in Susemihl s German edition of 1879 : 
but on that method the passage could be cited as (iv) Book II c. ii 10. Lastly, 
Bernays or Oncken would refer to it as (v) p. 31, if. 




I. Manuscripts and editions i 

II. Compilation and history n 

III. General estimate .......... 19 

IV. Economic Slavery and Wealth ....... 23 

V. Review of predecessors 32 

VI. Leading Principles ......... / 32- 

VII. Monarchy and the best state . . . . . . . \ 44 

VIII. Pathology opthe existing Constitutions J 56 

IX. Date and connexion with Ethics ....... 66 

X. Recent criticism of the text. 

Comparative worth of manuscripts 71 

Dislocations and double recensions . . . . . . 78 


Symbols and Abbreviations 136 


BOOK 1 138 

Excursus I. Epimenides 204 

Excursus II. On i. c. 6 . . . . . . . . 205 

Excursus III. The relation of x/o^/xaricm/d} to oiKOvo^in-r) . . . 209 
Note on I. 13. 12 . . . . . . . . . .211 

Note on i. 2. 13, I253a 20 24 212 

BOOK II. 213 

Note on Arcadia .......... 322 

Excursus I. The matriarchate . . . . . . . .326 

Excursus II. Hippodamos . . . . . . . 331 

Note on the Celtae 334 

Excursus III. Sparta and Crete ....... 335 

Excursus IV. Carthage . . 340 

Excursus V. Solon 350 

Excursus VI. Thaletas ......... 352 



Excursus I. Classification of Constitutions 447 

Excursus II. Pittacus . . . 451 

Excursus III. The Vatican fragments ...... 454 

Note on the basis of the text 460 

BOOK IV (VII) 469 

Excursus I. On e^urepiKol \6yot. 561 

Note on iv(vn). 11.6,13301)26 566 

Excursus II. The age of superannuation 566 

BOOK V (VIII) 569 

Excursus I. Aristotle s scheme of education ..... 619 

Excursus II. The Compositions of Olympus 621 

Excursus III. Ethos or character 622 

Excursus IV. Ancient Greek Music 624 

Excursus V. Suggestions on the text 638 

Note on Kadapacs 641 



Page 8, line 2 : for M. read Isaac 
P. 1 8, note 7, line 5 : for TTO\LTLKUV read TroXm/ccji/. 

P. 56, line 14 : for Stageira read Stagira (cp. Meisterhans 2 p. 43, n. 373) 
P. 69, note 2, line 3 : _/~6>r vbfj.ov read vb^wv 
Ib. line 4 : for voKireuav read TroAtreiuij 
P. 82, line 2 : _/0r airopiav read eviropiav (cp. below p. 312) 
P. 144, text, 1252 b 16, 17: _/0r //.dXtcrra 5 &>t/ce /cara (pvinv 

read //.aXicrra 5e /cara (f>v<ni> ot/ce 

Ib. commentary, right column, last line : for coecliche read coedichc 
P. 146, critical notes, line 3: after 28 insert r/5??] 
P. 147, text, 1253 a 3 : omit ecm 
Ib. critical notes, line 6 : transpose 
6 omitted by II 2 Bk 
to precede \\ 3 eVri M s 
7>fo/ zV, M<? 6 omitted by II 2 Bk is in 1253 a 2 before avdpuiros. Stohr reads 

av$pUTros : cp. Addenda p. 663 

P. 150, crit. notes, line 5 : for Qitaest. Cr. in. 3 ff., iv. 3 ff. read Quaest. crit. coll. 
(Lips. 1886) p. 334 ff 

Ib. line 8 : dele Ar. 

P. 151, crit. notes, line 8: after Quaest. Cr. 11. 5 f., IV. 5 f. insert Quaest. crit. 
coll. p. 336 ff 

P. 153, crit. notes, line 4: after Quaest. Cr. n. 7 ff. insert Quaest. crit. coll. p. 339 f 
P. 156, text, 1254 a 8, right margin: for (p. read (p. 6) 
P. 157, text, 1254 a 27 : for dirb read VTTO 

Ib. crit. notes, line 3: for Dittographia read Dittography 

crit. notes, line 9 : after a-rrb read FEE Bk. 1 Susem. 1 -- 
P. 160, text, 1254 b 14 : omit Kal 
P. 161, crit. notes, line i : after 18 insert early] 

P. 176, crit. notes, line 9: after Quaest. Cr. in. 5 ff. insert Quaest. crit. co/f.p. 352 f 
P. 178, comm. left column, line 9: for KeKTr)<Tdai read KeKrrjcrdai 
P. 1 80, crit. notes, line 3 : for t\v read T\V 
P. 182, text, 1257 a 38 : for Kal et read K^V d 
P. 183, comm. left col. line 8 : for 5, read see 

Ib. line 9 : for jJLTari0e|JLvwv read p.Ta0[i vcov 
P. 190, comm. left col. line 7 from below: after selling insert and 


P. 195, comm. right col. line 17 : after citizens insert a comma 

P. 197, text, 1259 b 32 : for [/cat] read Kal 

P. 200, text, 1260 a 30, right margin : remove qfrom line 30 to line 31 

Ib. comm. left col. line 5 from below: for jJiepos read jiepos 
P. 201, text, 1260 a 35, right margin: remove lofrom line 35 to line 36 
P. 209, To Excursus II. also belong remarks on B. I. c. 6 in Addenda p. 672 
P. 213, text, 1260 b 31 : for /ecu et read K.O.V et 

P. 216, comm. right col. line 14: for III. 8 4, 16 2, read III. 16 2, 
iv (vii). 8 4, 

P. 231, crit. notes, line 3 : for Bk. read Bk. 1 
P. 232, text, 1263 a 2 : f or ?X L > Tra<n read 2%et Tracri, 
P. 233, comm. right col. line 26: for I. 126 read I. 141 3 
P. 234, comm. left col. line 19: for I. 9. 9 read i. 7. 2, 1255 b 24 f 
P. 235, text, 1263 a 29 : for Trpoaedpevovres read irpoaeopevovTos 
P. 265, text, 1267 an: for SVVO.I.VTO read f3ov\oii>To 
P. 273, comm. left col. line 6 : for n. 9 raz*/ c. 1 1 9 

P. 2/9, crit. notes, last line: after Ephesus insert op. c. fol. i86 a p. 610, 16 ft. 
ed. Hayduck 

P. 281, comm. left col. line 5 : for evidences read evidence 

P. 282, text, 1269 b 1 8 : for del vo/j-ifeiv elvai read etVat del vofjdfeti> 

P. 284, comm. right col. line 12: read Stacrwfcrat 

P. 287, comm. left col. line 21 : for 8 6 read 7 6 

P. 297, comm. left col. line 13 : for p. 9 read p. 20 

P. 300, comm. left col. last line: for Ottfried read Otfried 

P. 301, comm. left col. line 4 : for TroXe/uw* read Trb\ewv 

P. 305, text, 1272 b 9 : for dwa&Twv read ovvaruv 

Ib. crit. notes, line 7 : after Schneider j| add ovvaffTuv II 1 Susem. lt2 || 
P. 306, text, 1272 b 13: for n read TL 

Ib. text, 1272 b 23 : for roaavO^ TJ/UUV elp^ffdd) read elprjcrdu roaavd 1 i)/juv 
P. 312, text, 1273 b 6 (bis, line 4 and line 18) : for airopiav read eviropiav 

Ib. crit. notes, line 3 : for 6 einroplav I n II-Ar. read 

6 aTTopiav FM s Ald. Bk. Susem. 1-1 
P. 314, text, 1273 b 25, left margin: dele (12) 
P. 317, comm. left col. line 16: dele Aristeides 
P. 326, line 9 : for iv. 130 read IV. 180 
P. 331, heading, line 13: for II. 7. i read n. 8. i 
P- 356, comm. left col. line u : for /SoAcucu read fioKaia.!. 
P. 359, text, 1275 b 17, left margin: dele (2) 
P. 362, text, 1276 a 5 : for ( read e< 

Ib. text, 1276 a 10 : read drj^oKparia (r6re yap 
P. 363, text, 1276 a 13: dele * 

and read <rvfJ.<f>4pov) e iirep ovv 

The parenthesis extends from 1276 a 10 (r6re yap to 1276 a 13 crv^epov) 

Ib. text, 1276 a 14 : for Kal read [/cat] 

Ib. text, 1276 a 15 : omit <ov> 

Ib. text, 1276 a 16: for Tvpavvioos. read rvpavvLdos ; 

Ib. crit. notes, line 3: after 14 read [/cat] Niemeyer (untranslated by William) 

Ib. crit. notes, line 4 : dele incorrect 

Ib. crit. notes, line 5 : after Hayduck add Susem. 1>2 


P. 364, text, 1276 a 26: for ryv read \rr\v~\ 

Ib. crit. notes, line 3: before 27 add [TTJV] Schneider Niemeyery^/ir^./. Phil. 
CXLIII. 1891, p. 414 || 

P. 367, text, 1276 b 30 : for Sicnrep read 610 

P. 370, comm. left col. last line : for dwavrat read dfoavrai 

P. 380, text, 1278 b 8 : for /ecu et read KO.V ei 

P. 382, crit. notes, line 2: nfter (corrector) add a semicolon 

P. 389, comm. right col. line 18 : for vn(v) read vu\(\} 

P. 396, text, 1281 a 16: with change of punctuation read ta-riv (<5oe yap... Status) 

P. 397, text, 1281 a 35, 36: transpose <f>av\oi> to precede 2x VTa and read 

(pavXov ^xovra ye ret ffv/J.f3alvovTa Tradi] irepl TTJV i/ u^V dXXd, (J.T] vb/J-ov. 

P. 430, comm. left col. line 21 : for 
Ib. line 23 : for eiridvfda read ti 
Ib. line 26 : for 6 read 6 

P. 431, text, 1287 a 39 : for TricrTevOfrras read 

Ib. crit. notes, line 10 : after right insert a comma and read irt-ffrevdevra.^ II fr. 
Bk. 1 Susem. 1 - 2 

P. 434, comm. right col. line 7 : for ev read eu 

P. 438, comm. left col. line i : after turn out insert anyhow," i.e. " 

P. 441, text, 1287 a 39 : for TreHrrevdevTas read jracrdevTa. s 

P. 444, crit. notes, line 1 1 : for dittographia read dittography 

P. 464, line 44: for 24 read 23 

P. 467, line 5 ff. : dele the sentence Again, one might have imagined... TroXtra a. 
Not so. 

P. 475, text, 1323 b 18 : for /ecu read [/ecu] 

P. 497, text, 1327 a 23 : for Trpbs read[irpbs] 

Ib. crit. notes, line 2 : for vTvapxovra read virap-^ovra. 

P. 503, text, 1328 a 16: for ol 5e read aide 

P. 521, text, 1330 b 30 : for iroXiv y.r? Trote?! read /JLTJ iroielv TTO\IV 

P. 529, text, 1332 a 13: omit /cat before dycry/fcucu 

P. 534, comm. left col. line 14 : for 1284 read 1254 

P- 535> text, 1332 b 31 : for TOVTUV irdvruv read TTO.VTWV TOIJTWV 

P. 537, text, 1333 a 26 : transpose diyprjo dai to precede Kal TOUTO rb yu^pos 
Ib. comm. right col. line 17 : for correlation read correlative 

P. 540, comm. right col. line 18 f. : for vui(v). 10, 7 2 read vin(v). i ro, 7 4 

P. 541, text, 1334 a 8 : for aviaffiv read afadffiv 

P. 545, head line : for 1333 a 40 read 1334 a 40 

P. 546, text, 1334 b 24 : for Tre<f)VKei> eyyivevdai read eyyiveaQai 

P. 549, text, 1335 a 27 : for xpovos wpifffifros read upicr/ui.ti os xpoj 

P. 559, text, 1336 b 34 : for 6 cra avruv read avrwv 6 cra 



ARISTOTLE S Politics has come down to us in manuscripts for the most 
part of the fifteenth century; there are indeed two, P :! and P~ (Bekker s 
P), which date from the fourteenth century, but none earlier. There 
is the Latin version by Lionardo Bruni of Are. zo (Leonardus Aretinus), 
made from the first manuscript brought into Italy from Greece in the 
fifteenth century, a manuscript now lost, which was probably older than 
the fifteenth century 1 . There is further an older translation, word for 
word into barbarous Latin, made in the thirteenth century, before 
A.D. 1274", by the Dominican monk William of Moerbeke. Its lost 
original was a Greek codex 3 which we will call T ; written, at the 
latest, in the early part of the thirteenth or latter part of the twelfth 
century, and probably of not much older date 4 . This translation 5 pri 
marily, together with four of the existing Greek manuscripts, three at 
Paris P 1 --- 3 , one at Milan M s , is now the critical basis for the text. 
All that the remaining manuscripts or the translation of Aretinus can 
claim is to supply confirmatory evidence in isolated passages : Areti 
nus, in particular, is much too free and arbitrary in his rendering, so 
that it is often impossible to infer, at least with any certainty, the 
reading of his Greek codex; hence many peculiarities of his transla 
tion must be passed over or regarded as merely his own conjectures. 

1 Very likely Francesco Filelfo brought Thomas Aquinas twice quotes it in the 
it from Constantinople in 1429 at the Siunma contra Gentiles^ writing probably 
request of Palla Strozzi : see the evidence A.D. 1261 1-265. TR.] 

for this in Oncken Die Staatskhre dcs 3 The best manuscript of this Old 

Aristotdes (Leipzig 1870. Svo) vol. I. Translation expressly states it. See 

p. 78. Compare my large critical edi- Susemihl op.cit. xxxiv. See also below 

tion, Aristotclis Politicorum libri octo p. 49 n. 2, p . 71 ff. 

cum vetusta translation* Gulidiid dc 4 On the date see Susemihl op. c. xn. 

Moerbeka (Leipzig 1872. Svo) p. XV. B With the text restored from manu- 

2 See Susemihl op. cit. p. vr. with scripts and old printed editions in my 
note 4. [Von Hertling places it about edition above mentioned. 

1260, Rhein. Mus. xxxix. 1884. p. 457. 



All these sources of the text fall into two families or recensions. 
One of them, on the whole the better, but often the worse in particular 
points, seems to be derived from a codex of the sixth or seventh century 1 , 
although in the quotations of single passages in Julian and even as early 
as Alexander of Aphrodisias the readings peculiar to this recension are 
partially, but only partially, found. Besides P the only manuscripts 
which belong, in the main, to this family are the following two : 

M s = Mediolanensis Ambrosianus B. 105 2 (in the Ambrosian Library 
at Milan), of the second half of the fifteenth century, much corrected 
by the copyist himself and in a few passages by a later hand collated 
by R. Scholl and Studemund : 

P 1 - Parisians 2023 (in the Bibliotheque nationale at Paris), written 
by Uemetrios Chalkondylas at the end of the fifteenth century, and then 
much corrected with a paler ink from a manuscript, of the other family. 
Corrections of this sort are hereafter denoted by p 1 , those made in the 
same black ink as the original text by (corr. 1 ), corrections which do not 
belong to either of these classes, or at all events are not with certainty 
to be reckoned with one or the other, are quoted simply as (corr.). In 
regard to this and all the other manuscripts, it is distinctly stated when 
any correction stands in the margin. P 1 was last collated by Dahms 
and Patzig. 

Just as in P 1 the two families are blended 3 , so conversely traces 
of the better recension are met with even in some manuscripts which 
belong, in the main, to the other family. This is true of many corrections 
and most of the glosses which are found in P 2 , the principal manuscript 
of this second family 1 ; still more frequently of the readings, corrections, 
and variants in P 4 ; so also of Aretinus translation and especially of P 5 ; 
to a less extent of the corrections by a later hand in some other manu 
scripts, and hardly ever of their original readings. The few excerpts from 

1 On the one hand the commentary 3 Or in its archetype, if Demetnos 

of the Neo-Platomc philosopher Proclus found the corrections which betray the 

(died 485) upon Plato s Republic is quoted second recension in the few cases where 

in a gloss on vm (v). 12. 8, which in all they are written with the same ink as his 

probability (see note 1 ) proceeds from original text already made, 

this archetype : on the other, certain cor- 4 For the same glosses which in P 1 can 

ruptions common to nil the sources de- be shown to be derived from the first 

rived from this family point to the con- recension meet us again in P 2 , and a 

elusion that the archetype was written in similar origin may be proved for others 

uncials (pai ticularly in. 14 12, 13 in P 3 in another way. On the other hand 

ovaiuv and ot xncu for Ovcriuv and Ova ion}. P- has few glosses in common with P :i , 

Now uncial writing ceased generally in and the number in P :! is but scanty, so 

the eighth century. Cp. Susemihl op. c. that the second recension appears to have 

xiv f.,XL\ r i f. had only a few glosses altogether. See 

- Ordinis superioris. Susemihl op. c. vm f . , xvni f. 


Aristotle s Politics in Codex Paris. 963, of the sixteenth century, are also 
derived from the better recension. 

Subject to these exceptions, all other manuscripts but those above- 
mentioned are to be reckoned with the second family, the text of which 
may be called the vulgate. They may be further subdivided into 
two classes, a better and a worse, and the latter again into three different 
groups : an intermediate position between the two is taken up by the 
translation of Aretinus and in a different way by C 1 . A more precise 
statement is afforded by the following summary. 

I. Better class : IT. 

P 2 = Coislin. 161 (brought originally from Athos : now with the rest 
of the Coislinian collection in the Bibliotheque nationale at Paris), of 
the 1 4th century; Bekker s I b ; last collated by Susemihl. The corrections 
and variants are written partly (i) in the same ink as the original text, 
partly (2) in darker ink, partly (3) in paler, yellower, partly (4) in red ink : 
these are indicated hereafter by (corr. 1 ), (corr. 2 ), (corr. :i ) and p 3 respec 
tively : where the ink appears to be wholly different, or cannot be brought 
with certainty under any of these classes, the sign will be (corr. 1 ). But 
all without exception, and the glosses as well, are in the same hand 
writing as the codex. 

P ! = Paris. 2026 of the beginning of the i4th century, for the greater 
part written by the same scribe, but finished by another hand ; the oldest 
manuscript that we have, but not so good as P 2 , especially in its original 
form before it had been corrected by a third and later hand and thereby 
made still more like P 2 than it was at first. It is true that most of these 
later corrections were subsequently scratched out again or wiped off, yet 
even then they remain legible enough. P 3 , like P 2 , was last collated by 

II. Worse class : IF. 
i. First group. 

P 4 = Paris. 2025 of the i5th century, much corrected but, with the 
exception of a single passage, only by the scribe himself, with various 
readings in the margin ; last collated by Susemihl. 

P 6 = Paris. 1857, written in the year 1492 in Rome by Johannes 
Rhosos, a priest from Crete ; last collated by Patzig for the first four 
chapters of Book I. Statements as to the readings of this manuscript 
in other single passages come from Bekker, from Barthelemy St Hilaire, 
and in particular from Patzig. 

I -2 


Q-Marcianus Venetus 200 (in the library of St Mark at Venice), 
also written by Johannes Rhosos, but as early as 1457 : collated by 
Bekker for Book I, and since then afresh for the first four chapters of 
that book, as above, by R. Scholl and E. Rohde. 

M b = Marcianus Venetus 213, of the beginning of the i5th century, 
collated by Bekker for i. c. i c. 6 8 and again by Rohde for i. cc. 

r A 

i /J.. 

U b = Marcianus Venetus, append, iv. 3, written in Rome in the 
year 1494, collated by Bekker for n. cc. i 7; in. 2 3 (1275 b 32 34), 
14 2io ; vi (iv). 3 84 3, 7 28 4 ; vm (v). 3 54 10, 
and by Rohde for i. cc. 14. 

L s = Lipsiensis (bibliothecae Paulinae) 1335, in the University 
library at Leipzig, of the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth 
century, most closely related to U b , collated by Patzig for i. i 4 and 
other single passages. We have information about readings in other 
parts of Books i. u. and v (vni). from Stahr and Schneider. 

C c denotes the codex used by Camerarius. 

Ar. = Arctinus, who must have used for his translation a codex of a 
very peculiar kind in which the two recensions were blended. For the 
translation is often in remarkable agreement with the manuscripts of 
this group ; though often, too, with the better class. Not seldom again 
it agrees with the first family : lastly, it here and there shows pecu 
liarities belonging exclusively to itself which can hardly be all set down 
to mere conjecture or arbitrariness on the part of the translator. 

2. Second group. 

C 4 = Florentinus Castiglionensis (in the Laurentian library at 
Florence) iv. (Acquisti nuovo), of the fifteenth century, collated by 
R. Scholl for i. i 4; n. i 2 3; vi (iv). i: in the opening chapters 
it is more in agreement wi Ji the better class. 

Q b = Laurentianus Si, 5 (in the Laurentian library at Florence), of 
the fifteenth century, collated by R. Scholl for i. i 4 and single 
passages elsewhere, by Bekker for Books n. in. vi (iv). 

R b = Laurentianus Si, 6, written by Johannes Thettalos in the year 
1494 at Florence, collated by Scholl for the same opening part and for 
isolated passages elsewhere, by Bekker for Books vn (vi). vm (v). It 
bears a great resemblance to Q b , particularly to the corrections of Q b in 
a later hand : but it has some peculiarities of its own. 

S b = Laurentianus 81, 21, of the fifteenth century, written more 
probably before than after Q b , to which it bears an extraordinary resem- 


blance; collated by Bekker for Books i. iv (vn). v (vm), and again by 
Scholl for the first four chapters of Bk. i, and for single passages 

T b = Urbinas 46 (transferred from Urbino to the Vatican library at 
Rome), of the fifteenth century, collated by Bekker for the first three 
books and for Bk. v (vm), then again by Hinck for Bk. i. i 4 and for 
detached passages by Scholl. It seems to be more nearly related to 
V b than to Q b , R b , S b . 

V b = Vaticano-Palatinus 160 (transferred from the Palatine library to 
the Vatican), also written by Johannes Thcttalos in the fifteenth century, 
collated by Bekker for Bks. iv (vn). vi (iv). vm (v), by Hinck for 
Bk. i. i 4, and by Scholl for several single passages. The corrections 
by a later hand in the opening paragraph (Bk. i. i 4) are in striking 
agreement with C 4 . 

3. Third group, more nearly related to the first group, in particular 
to U b L s , than to the second. 

W b = Reginensis 125 (Christinae reginae in the Vatican library), 
collated by Bekker for Bk. vm (vi), by Hinck for Bk. i. i 4, by 
Scholl for several single passages. This manuscript will have to be 
wholly neglected for the future, because, as I learn from communi 
cations made to me by Von Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, it is no earlier 
than the sixteenth or perhaps the seventeenth century, and was un 
doubtedly copied from the Aldine edition. 

Aid. = Aldina, the first edition of Aristotle published by Aldus 
Manutius, Venice, 1498, last collated for Bk. i. i 4 and for numerous 
single passages by Susemihl. 

Lastly an unique position amongst the manuscripts is taken by 
P 5 = Paris. 1858 or Colbert. 2401, dating from the sixteenth century. 
On the one hand this codex must be one of the worse manuscripts of 
the second family, although it cannot be exclusively assigned to any 
one of the three groups into which they fall l . On the other hand it 
frequently agrees with the first family, and not seldom alone of all the 
manuscripts that have come down to us it agrees with the old trans 
lation of William of Moerbeke : here and there it presents single 
readings, good or at least deserving of attention, which are to be 
found nowhere else, although it may very well be that they are not 
derived from earlier sources, but are, wholly or in part, mere con 
jectures of the scribe himself or of other scholars of that time. The 

1 Nor is P 5 now quoted under II 1 II 2 or II 3 in the critical notes of this edition. 


manuscript now contains only Bk. vm (v). from c. 6 9 onwards, 
Bk. vn (vi). Bk. iv (vn). and Bk. v (vm), the preceding part having 
been torn away ; the corrections are all by the scribe himself, except 
a few which are divided between two later hands. It was last collated 
by Susemihl ! . 

From all this it may be seen that, leaving out detached passages, 
the manuscripts collated, besides F M s p 1 - 2 - 3 - 1 Ar., are : 

for i. 14: P 6 C 4 QM b Q b R b S b T b U b V b W b L s Ald. 

i. 46 8 : Q M b S b T b . for vi (iv). i : C 4 Q b V b . 

i. 6 9-13 16 (end): vi (iv). 2 3 7 : Q b V b . 

Q S b T b . vi (iv). 3 84 4: Q b U b V b . 

n. i, 2 : C 4 Q b T b U b . vi (iv). 4 47 i : Q b V b . 

. 37 21 : Q b T b U b . vi (iv). 7 28 6 : Q b U b V b . 

8 m. 2 3 : Q b T b . vi (iv). 8 6 16 8 (end): 
2 3: Q b T b U b . Q b V b . 

m . 2 3 14 i : Q b T b . vn (vi) : P 5 R b W b . 

in. 14 2io : Q b T b U b . vm (v). i3 5 : R b V b . 

in. 14 10 18 2 (end): vm (v). 3 5 4io: R b U b V b . 

Q b T b . vm (v). 4 1 16 8 : R b V b . 

iv (vn): P 5 S b V b . vm (v). 6 912 18 (end): 

v(vm): P 5 S b T h . P 5 R b V b . 

In addition some readings of three late and bad Paris manuscripts, 
2041, 2042, 2043, containing only fragments of the work, have been 
made known by Barthelemy St Hilaire. 

II denotes the agreement of all the manuscripts we have, 

II I that of all the manuscripts of the first family (or at least their first 
hand), including r, 

IT that of all the manuscripts of the second family (and the Aldine 
edition), excluding P r> , 

Ft 3 that of all the worse manuscripts of this second family (/. e. all 
the MSS. known except F M s P 1 P 2 P 3 P 5 ), so far as they have been 
collated, and the Aldine edition. 

Bas. 1 2 3 denotes the three Basel editions of the years 1531, 1539, 
1550, the first complete editions of Aristotle published after the Aldine. 
Only the third is important, since in it the first use was made of the old 
Latin translation, and a great number of mistakes of preceding printed 
editions thereby corrected. The text so formed remained essentially, 

1 For more precise information on all these manuscripts see Susemihl /. c. pp. 



though of course with numerous alterations, the basis for succeeding 
editors (who consulted new manuscripts but sparingly and, if at all, for 
single passages only), until Gottling s time. He first used collations, 
but very insufficient ones, of P 1- - 4 5 and of a few leaves of M s , which 
had been made by Hase; and Bekker, while completely ignoring P 1 - 3 
M s and almost completely P 4 5 , founded his edition with undue arbitrary 
eclecticism either upon P 3 (Bekker s P) or upon that text which pre 
ceding editions had made the textus receptus. There was no collection 
of critical apparatus at once sufficiently complete and trustworthy before 
my critical edition, which rests so far as possible upon II 1 , the con 
sensus of the MSS. of the first family, viz. P, M s , P 1 : failing that, upon 
P 2 - 3 . There is less need then in a work, where the basis is the same, 
to give more than a mere selection of the most important and valuable 
readings. I shall, however, quote in full those which are found in 
Stobaeus extract (Ed. eth. n. p. 322 foil), and in the few citations of 
single passages in ancient writers, as Alexander of Aphrodisias, Julian, 
Pseudo-Plutarch -/re/at evyeyetas, etc. 1 

But however methodically we turn to account all these authorities 
we only obtain a text abounding in errors and defects of every kind. 
Accordingly a long series of editors, translators, and commentators 
from Sepulveda onwards have not failed to suggest numerous emen 
dations and attempts at emendation, of which all the more important 
will be found recorded in the present edition. The following is a list 
in chronological order of the scholars to whose conjectures an im 
proved text is due. 

Sepulveda. Latin translation ; first published at Paris, 1548. 4to. 

Camot. The fourth complete edition of Aristotle, Aldina minor or Camo- 
tiana; Venice, 1552. Svo. 

Vettori (Victorius). First edition of the Politics; Florence, 1552. 4: a second 
edition with commentary; Florence, 1576 fol. In the copy of the first 
edition now belonging to the Munich Library, there are marginal notes 
in Vettori s own handwriting, which have been used by me. Where 
necessary the two editions are distinguished as Vettori 1 , Vettori 2 . 

Morel. Edition, Paris, 1556. 4 ; closely following the first edition of Vettori. 

Lambin. Latin translation; first edition, Paris, 1567. 4. 

Camerarius. Politicorum ct Oeconomicorum Aristotelis intcrprctationcs ct 
explicationcs; Frankfurt, 1581. 4. 

Zwinger. Edition of the Politics; Basel 1582 fol.; closely following Vettori s 
2nd ed. 

1 Further particulars in Susemihl s References to these citations will be found 
larger edition as quoted above, p. XLV ff. in Clarendon type in the critical notes. 


Sylburg. Edition of the whole of Aristotle; Frankfurt, 1587.4. 
JM. Casaubon. Edition of the whole of Aristotle; Lyon, 1590. fol. 

Montecatino. Latin translation and commentary on the first three books 
of the Politics; Ferrara, 1587 (Bk. i), 1594 (Bk. n), 1598 (Bk. Ill), fol. 
(3 vols.). See Schneider s edition, II. p. v. 

RaniUS (Pierre de la Ramee). Edition and Latin translation of the Poli 
tics; Frankfurt, 1601. 8. 

Giphanius (Van Giffen). Coinmentarii in politician opus Aristotclis; Frank 
furt, 1608. 8. A posthumous work: wanting the whole of Bk. v(VIIl). 
and Bk. IV (vn). from c. 7 $ 5 to the end. 

Scaliger. See Scaligerana published by Oncken in Eos I. 1864. 410 ff. 

Piccart. In Politicos Aristotelis libros commentarius; Leipzig, 1615. 8. 

D. Heinsius. Edition of the Politics; Leyden, 1621. 8. 

Conring. Edition, Hclmstadt, 1656. 4. 

Reiske and Gurlitt. In the addenda to Schneider s edition, n. 471 ff. 

Reiz. Edition of iv(vil). 17 and the whole of v(VIIl), Trepi rfjs TroXeco? pciKapias 
KT\, Leipzig, 1776. 8. 

J. G. Schlosser. German translation of the Politics and Oeconomicsj Liibeck 
and Leipzig, 1798. 8 (3 vols.). The notes appended are in every respect 
of great interest for the reader even now, and have proved especially 
valuable. The memory of this excellent man should ever be cherished 
in Germany. 

Garve. A German translation of the Politics edited by Fiilleborn ; Leipzig, 
1799. 1802. 8 (2 vols.). 

J. G. Schneider. Edition of the Politics; Frankfurt on the Oder, 1809. 8 

(2 VOls.). 

Koraes, Edition, Paris, 1821. 8. 

F. Thurot. French translation of the Ethics and Politics; Paris, 1823. 8. 

Gottling. Edition of the Politics; Jena, 1824. 8. To this must be added 

the short dissertations: Commentariolum de Arist. Politiconnn loco 

(n. 6. 20); Jena, 1855. 4. De machaera DelpJiica quac cst ap. Arist. 

(l. 2. 3); Jena, 1858. 4. De loco quodam Arist. (i. 2. 9); Jena, 1858. 4. (In 

his collected writings Opusc. acad. ed. Cuno Fischer, Jena, 1869. 8. 

274 ff.) 
Barthelemy St Hilaire, Edition of the Politics with French translation ; 

Paris, 1837. 8. A second edition of the translation appeared, Paris, 

1848. 8. 
A. Stahr. Edition with German translation ; Leipzig, 1839. 4- To this 

should be added the German trans, by C. Stahr and A. Stahr; Stuttgart, 

1860. 1 6. 
Lindau. German translation (Oels, 1843. 8), unfortunately not accessible to 

me for my critical edition. 
Spengel. Ueber die Politik des Aristoteles, in the phil. Abhandl. der 

Miinchner A/cad. V. i ff. Aristotelische Studieu III. (ib. XI. 55 ff.); 

Munich, 1868. 4. Compare Arist. Stud. II. (ib. X. 626 ff.); Munich, 

1865. 4.44 ff. 


Bojesen. Bidrag til Fortolkningcn om Aristoidcs s Bogcr out Statcn; 

Copenhagen, 1844. 1845. S (Two Soroer Programmes). 

Nickes. De Aristotdis Politicorum libris; Bonn, 1851. 8 (Degree disser 

Eaton. Edition of the Politics; Oxford, 1855. s - 
Congreve. Ed. of Politics; London, 1855. 8. A second edition (unaltered), 

London, 1874. 8. 
Engelhardt. Loci Plato Jiici, quorum Aristotdcs in conscribcudis Politic is 

vidctur memor fuisse; Danzig, 1858. 4. 24 p. (In a collection of essays 

celebrating the jubilee of the Danzig Gymnasium). 
Rassow. Short Gymnasium-Programmes : Observationes criticac in Aris- 

totdcm, Berlin, 1858. 4. Bcmerkungcn iibcr ciirigc Stdlcii dcr Politik; 

Weimar, 1864. 4. Comp. also his Emcndationcs Aristoteleae, Weimar, 

1 86 1. 4 (p. 10) ; and Beitriige zur Nikoin. Ethik, Weimar, 1862. 4. 
C. Thurot. Observationes criticae in Arist. politicos libros, an article in 

Jahrbiichcr fur Pliilologic, LXXXT. 1860. 749759; and especially 

Etudes sur Aristote, Paris, 1860. 8. 
Schiitz. Gymn.- Programmes : De fundaincntis rdpublicae, quae priino 

Politicorum libra ab A ri stotdc posita sunt, I. n.; Potsdam, 1860. 4. 18 p., 

III. Potsdam, 1860. 4. 12 p. 
Oncken. Degree dissertation: Emendationum in Arist. Eth. Nic. ct Polit. 

specimen; Heidelberg, 1861. 8 : and the large work in two volumes 

Staatsldire dcs Aristotdes ; Leipzig, 1870, 1875. S- 
Bonitz. AristotdiscJie Studien II. III.; Vienna, 1863. 8. Zur Aristot. Pol. 

II. 3. 1262 a 7, an article in Hermes, VII. 1872. 102 108. 
Bernays. Die Dialoge dcs Aristotdcs; Berlin, 1863. 8. A German transla 
tion of the first three books, Berlin, 1872. 8. Zu Aristotdes und 

Simonides, an article in Hermes, V. 1870. 301, 302; Aristotdes iibcr den 

Mittelstand in Hermes, vi. 1871. 118 124. 
Hampke. Gymn.-Programme : Bemerkungen iibcr das crste BucJi dcr 

Polit., Lyck, 1863. 4; and four articles in Philologus, on Arist. Pol. 

IV (vn). cc. 2, 3 in vol. XIX. 1863. 614 622, on n. 5, xxi. 1864. 541543, 

on Book i. XXIV. 1866. 170 175, Zur Politik xxv. 1867. 162 166. 
Schnitzel. Zu Arist. Pol., an article in Eos; I. 1864. 499 515. His 

German translation was published in the series of Osiander and Schwab 

at Stuttgart, 1856. 16. 
Bocker. Degree dissertation, D-c quibusdam Pol. Arist. locis; Greifswald, 

1867. 8. 45 P. 
Susemihl. Three editions, see Preface: articles in Rheinisches Museum, 

XX. 1865. 504517, xxi. 1866. 551571 ; \Kjahrb.f.Philol. xcm. 1866. 

327333, cm. 1871. 790792; in Philologies, xxv. 1867. 385415, 

xxix. 1870. 97 119; in Hermes xix. 1884. 576 595; and Indices 

Scholarum, De Polit. Arist. quaestionum criticarum part. I vn. ; 

Greifswald 1867 9. 1871-2-3-5. 4. 
Biichsenschiitz. An article on i. cc. 8 11 in Jahrb.f, Philol xcv. 1867. 



Chandler. Miscellaneous emendations and suggestions; London, 1866. 
Madvig. Adversaria critica ad scriptorcs Graccos; Copenhagen, 1871. 8, 

461 ff. 
H. Sauppe. Hayduck. M. Vermehren. In communications made to me 

for my first critical edition of 1872, together with one or two conjectures 

of Godfrey Hermann sent me by Sauppe. Cp. also Sauppe s Epist. crit. 

ad G. Hermannum. 
Biicheler. In my first critical edition and in Part I. of my Quacstiones 

critieae; Greifswald, 1867. 4. 
Mor. Schmidt. In communications for my first critical edition; also an 

edition of Book I. Arist. Pol. Liber I.; Jena, 1882. 4 (2 parts) ; and an 

article in Jahrb. f. P/iilol. cxxv. 1882. Soi 824. 
Vahlen. AristoteliscJie Aufsiitze II.; Vienna, 1872.8; reviewed by me in 

P/iitol. Anzcigcrv. 1872. 673676; and an article on II. 5, 1264 a i, in 

the Zcitschrift f. d. bstr. Gymn. XXL, 1870. 828 830. 
Polenaar. Degree dissertation; Tirocinia critica in Arist. Politicaj Leyden, 


Trieber. In communications with me by letter. 
Henkel. Studicn zur Geschichte der Griechischen LeJire vom Staatj Leipzig, 

1872. 8. 

Riese. An article in Jahrb.f. PJiilol. cix. 1874. 171 173. 
Diebitsch. Degree diss., DC re rum in Arist. libra dc re pub.j Breslau, 

1875. 8. 
Heitland. Notes critical and explanatory on certain passages in Pol. I.j 

Cambridge, 1876. 8. 
Broughton. Edition of Looks I. in. iv (vn) with short notes, Oxford and 

London, 1876. 16. 
Bender. Kritische und exegetische Bemerkitngen; Hersfeld, 1876. 4; further 

in communications with me by letter. 
Freudenthal. In communications with me by letter. 
H. Jackson. Articles in the Journal of Philology on I. 3. vn. 1877. 236 

243; on IV (vn). 13. 5 7, x. 1882. 311, 312 : also in communications by 

letter published in the Addenda of my third edition, Leipzig, 1882. 
Postgate. Notes on the text and matter of the Politics; Cambridge, 1877. 8. 
Von Kirchmann. German translation with notes ; Leipzig, 1880. 8 (2 vols.). 
Tegge. In oral communications to me. 

J. Cook Wilson. Article in the Journal of Phil. X. 1881. 8086. 
Busse. Degree diss., DC praesidiis Arist. Pol. emcndandi; Berlin, 1881. 8. 

52 p. 
Ridgeway, Notes on Arist. Pol. in the Transactions of the Cambridge 

Philological Society, li. 1882. 124153. 

Welldon. English translation with notes; London, 1883. 8. 
H. Flach. An article on Book v (vin) in Jahrb. f. PhiloL cxxvir. 1884. 




In recent times critics seem more and more disposed to agree that 
the systematic writings of Aristotle, that is to say, most of the works 
that have come down to us together with others that have perished, 
were never actually published by their author himself l . At the end of 
the fifteenth chapter of the Poetics he contrasts the exposition there 
given with that contained in his published works, to which upon certain 
points the student is referred, etp^rat Se Trepl avrwv tv rots eK-SeSo^eVois 
Aoyots IKCU/CO?, the reference being undoubtedly to one of his own 
dialogues, that namely On Poets 2 . Of the works which had thus been 
given to the world some information may be gathered, as that they 
chiefly comprised popular writings like the dialogues, adapted to the 
intelligence of a wider public; perhaps also descriptive works on natural 
science, histories of plants and animals. But not the Poetics, nor 
indeed any of the similar treatises strictly philosophical and systematic 
which make up " our Aristotle," to use Crete s phrase : we may safely 
conclude that they were none of them in circulation at the time. It 
has indeed been doubted whether they were primarily written with a 
view to publication. They had their origin in the oral lectures of the 
Stagirite, and stood in the closest connexion with his activity as a 
teacher ; this much is clear, but the precise nature of the connexion has 
been sorely disputed. The materials of these works may have been 
on the one hand Aristotle s own notes ; either sketches drawn up before 
hand for his lectures ; or, which is more likely, reproductions of them 
freely revised and enlarged for subsequent study in the school. Or, 
again, they may have been merely lecture-notes taken down by pupils 
at the time. The former supposition is favoured by the analogy of 
Aristotle s master, Plato, who takes this view of his strictly philo 
sophical writings in the famous passage in the Phaedrus*. Nor is 
there any reason to distrust the evidence that shortly after his masters 

1 [What follows has been freely con- Bnrsian s Jahresbericht xvii. 1879. 251 

densed from a paper On tlie composition 254 ; and Zeller On the connexion of 

of Aristotle s Politics in Verhandlungen the works of Plato and Aristotle with their 

der xxx. Philologen-Versammlung, 17 ff. personal teaching in Hermes XI. 1876. 84 

(Leipzig, 1876), and from the Introduc- 96. 

tion to the Poetics (Greek and German), 2 15 12, 1454!) 17: see note (208) to 

edited by Susemihl (Leipzig, 1874. ed. 2) Susemihl s edition of the Poetics. 
It is 

I 6. It is thus mostly earlier than the 3 2760: eairry re virofj-v^ara drjaavpi- 

discussion in the 3rd edition of Zeller, $p.evos, els rb XrjOrjs yr/pas eav I /O/TCU, Kal 

Phil: d. Griechen II ii chap. 3. 126 138, iravTlT^TavTov tx^os fj.en6vTi, 278 A: d\\a 

which should be compared.] See also T$ OVTL auruiv TOVS /SeXrt crTous 

Jahrbiicher f. Phil. CHI. 1871. 122 124;]<nv 


death Theophrastos had Aristotle s autograph of the Physics in his 
possession \ Something similar may be inferred for other works if it be 
true that Eudemos edited the Metaphysics , and that Theophrastos 
(probably also Eudemos) supplemented modified and commented upon 
the Prior and Posterior Analytics in writings of his own bearing the 
same titles 3 : this is at any rate precisely the relation in which the 
PJiysics and EtJiics of Eudemos stood to those of his master. The 
writings of Aristotle then were designed to serve as aids to the further 
study of his pupils : they were the text-books of the Aristotelian school. 

In support of the other hypothesis has been adduced a number of 
passages which contrast decidedly with the immediate context by 
unusual vivacity or sustained style, or by especially prominent allusions 
to an audience as if present. Here the readiest explanation is that the 
editors have actually made use of notes taken down by pupils. Such 
passages have been collected by Chicken from the N icoinachean Ethics"; 
the latter part of Politics iv (vii). c. i, and the conclusion, if genuine, of 
De Soph. Elench. are further instances. It should be remembered also 
that in one catalogue of the Aristotelian writings the Politics appears as 
iroXiTiKTi a/cpo aats 5 , while ^V(TLKTJ aKpoa<rts is still the title borne by the 
PJiysics in our manuscripts. All these circumstances however can be 
satisfactorily explained in other ways, partly upon the former hypothesis, 
partly by assuming a merely occasional use to have been made of 
pupils lecture-notes as subsidiary sources : an assumption which it is 
hardly possible to disprove 1 . 

In the Aristotelian writings we find a great diversity of treatment 
and language; at one time the briefest and most compressed style 
carried to the extreme of harshness, at another numerous needless 
redundancies, and often literal repetitions. The careless familiar expres 
sions natural in oral discourse alternate with long artistic periods 
absolutely free from anacoluthia ; at times the composition of one and 
the same book appears strangely unequal, as if the material which at 

1 See Ileitz, Die verlorenen Schriften mentary on the Metaphysics 483. 19 eel. 

12. Eudemos wrote to Theophrastos to Bonitz : /cat ot/xat KOI raDra /ecu e/cetVots 

enquire concerning the reading of a pas- 5et avvTarreadai, /cat t crws VTTO fikv Apicr- 

sage in the Physics, Qeofipdcrrov ypd\f/av- roreXous owr^ra/crcu...^? 5 TOV Evdr/- 

TOS Evd-f)/j,t}} Trepi TWOS aurou TCOI> dnj/bLaprrj- /u,ov /cexciptcrrat. 

ntvuv a.i>Tiypd(pwv /caret TO Tre/j-Trrov /3t- 3 Alexander, ScJwl. in Arist. 158 b 8, 

f3\ioi> " virep wj> " (p7]<r[v " eTreVretXas 161 b 9, 184 b 36, and Simplicius ib. 

Ke\evi>)v fj.e ypd-^ai /cat ciTrcxrretXcu e/c rwz/ 509 a 6: see Zeller II ii 71. 


uv, TJTOL eyu ov 1^/77^1, r? fjuKpbv TL 4 Staatslehre des Arist. I. 60 (i). 

TrayreXtSs e ^et TOV dva/u-ecrov TOV oirep ripe- 5 DiS Lciert- v. 24. 

fj.tlv /caXw TUIV a.Kt.vr)Tuv yuoVoi/." Simpli- 6 See the arguments advanced against 

cius Cojnin. in Arist. Physica, 231 a 21, Oncken by Susemihl Jahrb. fur Phil. 

Schol. in Arist. (lirandis), 404 b n ft. cm. 1871. 122 124. 
2 Alexander of Aphrodisias in his com- 


first flowed abundantly had suddenly become scanty. Such peculiarities 
however generally admit of more than one explanation; even where the 
same question is treated independently two or three times over (unless 
indeed one of the versions is to be regarded as the paraphrase of a 
Peripatetic) the inference may be cither that different drafts of 
Aristotle s own have been incorporated side by side 1 , or that a pupil 
has supplemented the notes which he had actually taken by a statement 
in his own words of their substance. Yet at other times the contrast is 
unmistakeable, as when we compare the Posterior with the Prior 
Analytics, or the third book of the Psychology with the two preceding 
books : we seem to have before us nothing but disjointed notes or 
rough drafts badly pieced together. Such imperfection in whole 
works can hardly be referred to any one but Aristotle 2 . If some 
treatises, again, or at least considerable portions of them, prove upon 
examination so far advanced that the author s last touches hardly seem 
wanting, the inference is irresistible that, granted they arose at first out 
of Aristotle s oral lectures, with such fulness of details and elaboration 
they must have been intended for ultimate publication, whether in the 
author s lifetime or subsequently. Thence it is easy to pass on to 
the provisional assumption that Aristotle intended to bring his entire 
Encyclopaedia to the same degree of completeness, but was prevented 
by death from executing his design. As it is, we seem justified in con 
cluding that the unfinished works were brought out by his immediate 
pupils from a combination of the materials above mentioned, pieced 
together and supplemented by not inconsiderable additions : much in 
the same way (to use Eernays instructive analogy) as most of Hegel s 
works for the first time saw the light in the complete edition made by 
his pupils after his death. 

There is a further circumstance which must be taken into account. 
From this edition, of which comparatively few copies were ever made or 
in circulation 3 , the works as they have come down to us must be allowed 
to deviate considerably. Our present text can be traced back in the 
main to the revised edition of Andronikos of Rhodes, a contemporary 
of Cicero 4 . This edition is known to have differed as to order and 

1 As in the Metaphysics, K cc. i 7= n. 5, Dicls Doxographi Gracci 187 f., 
B.T.E; A cc. 15; M cc. 4, 5=A c. 9. 215 ff., Zeller op. c. n ii 138154. 

2 In il\Q Physics, Bk. VII, Metaphysics, 4 Strabo /. c., Plutarch Sulla 26, Por- 
Nicomachean Ethics, are other instances phyry Vita Plotini 26, Gellius xx. 5. 10; 
only less striking than those named. Ptolemaeus as cited by Ibn el-Kifti and 

3 So far we may accept Strabo s in- Ibn Abi Oseibia, Rose (in vol. v of the 
ferences (xnr. 608, 609), although his Berlin ed.) p. 1473, Casiri Bibliothcca 
story of the fate of Theophrastos library Arab.-Hispana p. 308 l>, Wenrich De 
contains a gross exaggeration : see now aiictontm Grace, versionibus p. 157; also 
Bursiarfs Jahresber. IX. 338; XVI. 253 f. by David and Simplicius Scholia in Arist. 


arrangement from the former one; besides, in the intervening 250 years 
the text had received considerable damage. Thus may be explained 
the appearance of numerous Peripatetic interpolations; also cases where 
a series of fragments represents the original work, as in Bk. vn of the 
Nicomachean Ethics, and in some measure in the Poetics 1 ; or where 
excerpts from another work are inserted, e.g. from the Physics in the 
latter part of Bk. xi (K) of the Metaphysics and in part of what is now 
Bk. v (A) of the same work 2 . 

Only by such a combination of assumptions is it possible satis 
factorily to interpret the present condition of the Politics, where traces of 
its mode of compilation may clearly be discerned in interpolations, 
glosses incorporated in the text, abrupt transitions, inequalities of 
execution, frequent lacunae, transpositions and double recensions. Yet 
the whole is pervaded by an organic plan w r ell considered even to the 
finest details :i , and beyond all doubt the actual execution is mainly based 
upon written materials from Aristotle s own hand 4 . There is only one 

(vol. iv of the Berlin ed.) 25 b 42 f. , Si a 
271"., 404 b 38 f. ; Zeller op. c. II ii 50 ff. 
139 1111. ([), (2), in i 620 ff. ; Ileitz Die 
I crlorentii Schriften i 53. 

1 See Susemihl s ed. of the Poetics, 
pp. 36. 

- The hypotheses above noticed may 
thus be recapitulated. Aristotle did not 
himself publish his scientific works. They 
may have been tdi\\&. primarily 

(i) from Aristotle s own drafts as 
revised after his lectures for the use of his 

pupils : supplemented by the use, as 

(ll) subsidiary sources, of 
(a) Aristotle s own sketches, prepared for 

use at his lectures : 
(/3) lecture-notes taken by pupils (with or 

without supplements of their own) : 
(7) passages from works by his pupils : 
(<5) additions by editors : very rarely 

(e) excerpts from his own works. 

;J Sober criticism will not be deterred 
from attributing the plan to Aristotle 
simply because at the beginning of Bk. 
Ill there is no oe in the received text to 
correspond to a preceding [j.ev ovv, or 
because a connecting 5e is sought in vain 
in II 1 at the opening of Bk. II, and should 
at least be altered to ydp. if this opening 
and the close of Bk. I are to be kept side 
by side. Such twofold transitions from 
one book to another are found in the 
Nicomackcan Ethics between iv and v, 
vii and vni, ix and x ; while between 
vin and IX Grant has good ground for 
suspecting the words irepl fj,v ovt> TOVTOJV 
tiri Toaovrov elp-f]<T0u 1163 b 27. [On the 

transition from Mttaph. VI (E) to vii (Z) 
see Bonitz II 294.] 

4 That the work in its present shape is 
as late as Cicero s time is the opinion of 
Krohn Zur Kritik aristotcliscJicn Schriften 
I 29 ff. (Brandenburg 1872. 4), and Pole- 
mar Tirocinia critica in Aristotelis Po- 
litica (Leyden 1873. S), and in one sense 
they are not far wrong ; cp. the introduc 
tion to my edition of the Poetics, 4 ;/. (i). 
They suppose the compiler or compilers 
to have had mere fragments of Aristotle s 
own composition before them, which they 
arranged and pieced together for them 
selves into a whole full of contradictions 
by borrowing from the writings of Theo- 
phrastos and other Peripatetics, or, as 
Polenaar thinks, by additions of their 
own. Polenaar s arguments, however, rest 
almost entirely on misapprehensions, and 
this is partly true of Krohn s, while others 
do not in the remotest degree suffice 
to establish such sweeping assertions. 
Krohn does indeed allow that the first 
book is by Aristotle; but from 13 15 he 
infers that it was originally an independ 
ent work, not reflecting that, when taken 
in connexion with 3 i, this passage 
proves just the opposite ; that further the 
first chapter has no sense except as an 
introduction to the whole of the Politics, 
of which we have also an express antici 
pation at the commencement of c. 3, 
where there is no trace of a change by 
another editor. The greater part of 
Bk. II, in which only "isolated pillars" 
of Aristotle s structure have been left 


passage of any length, iv (vn). i, where we seem to catch the tones of 
the more animated oral lecture in such marked contrast to all the rest 
of the work as forcibly to suggest the idea that here we have the 
lecture-notes of a pupil l . But the parts executed are often unequal ; 
they never grew to the dimensions of a book actually fit for 
publication; and when such a work made its appearance after the 
master s death the editors did not refrain from adding a good deal of 
foreign matter contradictory of the spirit and interdependence of the 
work 2 . Here and there, again, we find a twofold discussion of the 

standing, he assigns to Thcophrastos ; 
c. 6, lie says, is wholly spurious and of 
very late origin, c. 5 defective and largely 
interpolated : and that there is much to 
offend us in both these chapters is unde 
niable : see below p. 33 n. (4). The third 
book he seems to regard as a medley 
taken from Theophrastos, and various 
writers of his school, and from other Pe 
ripatetics : c. 14 in particular as an ex 
cerpt from Theophrastos, Ilept /Sao-tXeias: 
cp. p. i8;/. (7) and //. on in. 14.9 (624). In 
the principal part of Bk. IV (vn) he finds 
" fragmentary sketches "; he agrees with 
Niebuhr (Rom. Altcrth. 578 Isler) in de 
ciding that the second and larger part, 
if not the whole, of 13k. v (viu) was not 
written by Aristotle, any more than a 
considerable part of 13k. vi (iv), of which 
c. 15 together with vn (vi). 8 is an ex 
cerpt from a work by Theophrastos on 
magistracies ; while the greater part of 
13k. vill (v) probably consists of excerpts 
and pieces retouched from Theophrastos, 
Ilepi : comp. ;///. on III. 14. 9 (624) 
and vni (v). n. 9 (1720*). There are 
some resemblances to the Areopagitikos 
of Isocrates : see on ill. 3 2, 9, 
6 10, 7 i, ii 20, iv (vn). 4 5, 
vi (iv). 9 7, vn (vi). 5 10, vin (v). 
I 2. Yet Spengel s assertion " totum 
Isocratis Areopagiticum in usum suum 
Aristoteles vertit, tarn multi sunt loci, 
qui eadem tradunt " (Aristotdischc Stu- 
dien ill. 59) is a gross exaggeration, as un 
proved as it is impossible to prove. But 
why Aristotle should not be credited with 
them, why we must follow Krohn in re 
jecting as spurious all the passages where 
they occur, is simply inexplicable. Com 
pare further my review of Krohn in 
Philol. Anzeiger v. 1873. 676 680. The 
most material objection which he raises 
to the genuineness of Bk. V (vin) is that 
ef#ow<rtafeii>, evdovcnav are elsewhere 
only found in spurious or semi-spurious 
Aristotelian writings, evdovfriaaTiKos only 

in the Problems, eVfloi crtacr/xos only in the 
dialogue On Philosophy, whereas Theo 
phrastos paid great attention to this morbid 
state of ecstasy or delirium. 

1 13ut a pupil of Aristotle, not neces 
sarily of Theophrastos, as Krohn thinks : 
see notes on iv (vn). i 2 f., 13. 
Another well-written chapter is vi (iv). 
1 1 , and this even Krohn reckons as part of 
"the well-preserved patrimony of Aristo 
telian thought." His attempt even there 
to ferret out at least an interpolation, 
15, rests upon nothing but a gross mis 
conception, as is shown by Susemihl loc. 
cit. p. 679. 

- To start from the internal connexion 
of a work as a whole is the only safe mode 
of procedure in all so-called higher criti 
cism. By discarding this principle Krohn 
and Polenaar lose all solid fooling, pre 
ferring, as they do, to regard mere 
unconnected fragments as the genuine 
kernel of the work : Susemihl loc. cit. 
679. Not every contradiction is sufficient 
proof of diversity of authorship ; how 
ever small the dimensions within which 
this genuine Aristotelian kernel is re 
duced, we shall never succeed in elimi 
nating from it all discrepancies of doc 
trine. Nay, Krohn justly reminds us that 
" even this original kernel can only be 
understood on the assumption of a gradual 
advance in the great thinker s develop 
ment." After we have detected interpo 
lations, and restored by their excision the 
connexion which they restored, only an 
accumulation of difficulties, or such con 
tradictions as strike at the very heart of 
the system, need be taken into account. 
Further it must be admitted that no hard 
and fast line can be drawn here, so that 
at times the decision is doubtful. Upon 
such considerations a list of spurious or 
suspected passages (without reckoning 
glosses of later introduction and other 
smaller matters) might be drawn up, in 
partial agreement with Krohn, as follows: 



same topic ; either both were found amongst Aristotle s materials and 
then included that nothing might be lost, or else only one was written 
by Aristotle and the other was derived from a pupil s notes. The work 
is disfigured by numerous lacunae of greater or less extent: entire 
sections of some length are wanting altogether 2 . The right order has 
often been disturbed 3 . The two grossest instances are that Books vn 
and vin should come before Bk. iv, and Bk. vi before Bk. v (counting the 
books in the order in which they have come down to us) 4 . No scruple 
has been felt about restoring the proper sequence in this edition, though 
the dislocation was unquestionably very ancient 5 . For to all appearance 

ii. 8 i (ds...j8ovXo/*6i o*), 10 3, 4, 
12 614: 

iv (vn). 2 3 4 i, 10 19: 

v (vin). 7 13, 14: 
vi (iv). cc. 3, 4 119. 
VII (vi). 2 7 (e T6.../3amucn a), 2 9 
vin (v). 6 5, 6 12, 13, 7 510, 

12 i6, perhaps also 12 7 18. 
To this total of about 515 lines shorter 

bits must be added from n. 6 18; in. 
14 15, 15 ii ; vi (iv). 7 5, 14 5. 
On vi (iv). 14 ii 15 see below p. 65 
n. (i). Several of these passages display 
historical erudition valuable in itself but 
out of place a characteristic of the 
school as contrasted with the master. 
As to the doubts recently cast upon IV 
(vn). 7 by Broughton, and upon iv (vn). 

13 by Broughton and Wilson (and earlier 
still by Congreve), see the critical notes 
and ;/. on iv (vn). 13 8 (88 1). 

1 Besides the end of Bk. ill and the 
beginning of IV (vn) see II. 7 10 13 
= 7 1821, in. 15 7 10= 16 TO 

1 3 ; IV (VII). I II, 12=2 I, 2; 

viii (v). i i ; 7 i ; 10 24= 10 25. 

2 See particularly I. 8 3, 10 r, 12 
i ; ii. 2 6, 5 2, ii 5; 

in. 3 2, 12 6, 13 3, 6, i6 2; 

iv (vn). ii 2, 13 ii, 14 7; 

v (vin). 7 15; 

vi (iv). 8 7, 8, 10 2, n i, 12 5; 

vii (vi). 4 i, 8 24; 

vin (v). i 7, 7 9, 10 25, 12 ii, 
1 8. Conring saw this, but carried it 
too far : "noctem aristoteliam quasi stellis 
illustrate sategit" Gottling sneeringly 
writes, takingcredit forhavingput all Lhese 
" stars " out. But when the asterisks are 
removed the lacunae are still plain enough 
if the critic has the eye to see them. Cp. 
my critical edition p. LII. 

3 [On these transpositions see pp. 78 

4 The one transposition was first made 
by Nicolas Oresme (died 1382) in his 
French translation, not published until 
long afterwards (Paris 1489): and again 
by Segni in his Italian translation (Flo 
rence 1549). A more detailed proof of 
its correctness was undertaken by Scaino 
da Salo Qningue Quaestioncs ad octo libros 
de republica (Rome 1577), Conring, Bar- 
thelemy St Hilaire, Spengel Ueber die 
Politik Transactions of the Munich Acad. 
v. i ff. Arist. Stndicn II. 44 ff. (Munich 
1865). Nickes De Arist. Politicorum libris 
(Bonn 1851), Brandis in his history Griech- 
Roui. Philos. n ii 1666 ff., 1679 ff. and 
by others. It has been disputed without 
success, amongst others by Woltmann in 
the Rheinisches JMuscitni (New Series) i. 
1842. 321 354, Forchhammer in Philo- 
logus xvi. 1861. 50 68, Bendixen in /*/ - 
lologns xin. 1858. 264 ff., xiv. 332 ff., 
xvi. 408 ff. and in Der altc Staat des 
Aristuteks (Hamburg 1868. 4to), by 
Krohn op. c. 30, and Diebitsch De reriim 
concxu in Arist. libris dc re pttblica (Bres- 
lau 1875). 

The other transposition was very nearly 
assumed by Conring ; the first who ac 
tually made it and tried to demonstrate 
it was St Hilaire. He was followed by 
Spengel and even by Woltmann, but was 
opposed not merely by Bendixen, Forch 
hammer, Krohn, and Diebitsch, but even 
by Hildenbrand Gcschichte und System 
der Rechts- nnd Staatsphilosophie I (Leip 
zig 1860) 371 f., and by Zeller op. cit. n 
ii 672 f. ;;. (2), although they have ac 
cepted the first transposition, Hildenbrand 
under certain conditions and Zeller unre 
servedly. See below p. 58 ;/. 2. 

5 See Jahrbtichcr fur Philologie XCix. 
1869. 593610, Ci. 1870. 343 f-, 349 f - 
and the following paragraphs in the 


even the epitome in Stobaeus l presents the traditional arrangement 2 : 
and this epitome was taken from a more comprehensive work by Areios 
Didymos of Alexandria, the friend of Augustus and of Maecenas :! . 
Didymos naturally followed the new recension, the work, beyond all 
doubt, of his contemporary Andronikos of Rhodes, in which, as has 
been said 4 , the text of the Politics has come down to us. Yet, as we 
shall see 5 , in the incomplete sentence with which the third book breaks 
off sufficiently clear and certain evidence remains that in the older 
edition Bk. iv (vn) still stood in its right place after Bk. in. 

But there is another circumstance which makes it very question 
able to start with, whether the work ever existed in a more complete 
form. There was a Politics in the Alexandrian library attributed by 
some to Aristotle, by others to Theophrastos"; consisting, it would 
seem, of exactly eight books ; a numerical correspondence not easy to 
ascribe to mere accident. This fact we learn from the catalogue 
of Aristotle s writings in Diogenes of Laerte 7 and in the Anonymus of 
Menage 8 . The catalogue goes back to the biographies of Hermippos 
of Smyrna, a pupil of Callimachus, as its ultimate authority ; and no 
doubt that author followed closely what he found in the Alexandrian 
library". Before this the Peripatetic philosopher Hieronymos of Rhodes 
appears to have used the Aristotelian Politics; even Eudemos may 
possibly betray an earlier acquaintance with the treatise n . And it is 

1 Ed. eth. 326 ff. Berlin Aristotle v. 1467. No. 70). Me- 

2 See Henkel s careful investigation nage incorrectly gave K, which Zeller 
Zur Politik dcs Aristotelcs (a Gymnasium O p. c . n ii 75 eel. 2 had conjectured to be a 
Programme of Seehausen) Stendal 1875. mistake for 1L Rose slu , ge sts that the 
4- PP- 10-17. Buchsenschutz in his Anonymus was Hesychios of Miletus, 
Studien zu Aristoteles Politik 126 fl< A>D> In Pto]emy > s cata i gue the 
(Festschrift zu der it en Sdcularfcicr dcs wo ;: k ()Ccurs as NQ< /?7v; , dg iminc 
Fnedrichs - Werderschen Gymnasiums, Citatum ct nommatnr bulitikun tracta- 
Berlin 1881) judges differently: but see tns vm (Berlin Aris> vol y _ }> 
the review by Cook Wilson in the Philol. 9 See the Intro duction to my edition 
Rundschau 1882. pp. 12191224. of the Poctics (e(1> j ^ { 

3 See Meineke Zu Stobaeos in the Zeit- 10 He is quoted in Diog. Laert. I 26, 
schriftf. Gymnasialw. xm. 1859. 563 ff., cp. Pol. I. n. 9 with the critical notes. 
Zeller op. c. in i 614 f., Diels Doxographi n See my third edn. of the Politics xix 
GraeciGgft. notef: End. Eth. vn. 2 1238!) 5 ff. 

4 See p. 13 n. 4. should be compared with Pol. iv (vn). 

5 Seep. 47 f. 13 57: End. Eth. vm. 3 1248 b 

6 Zeller suggests that this confusion 26 ff., 1249 a 12, with Pol. iv (vn). 13 
may be explained if Theophrastos edited 7. Compare further End. Eth. ill. 2 
the work: op.c. n ii 678 (i). 1231 b 38 1232 a 5 with Pol. I. 9 2 

7 V. 24: TroXiTLKTJs aKpoaffews [cos] ?? [for 1257 a 6 Jo; End. Eth. II. 11 1227 b 
the MS. 17] Qeo<ppacTTov d 77. Cp. Usener 19 23 with Pol. iv (vn). 13 2 1331 b 
Analecta Theophrastea 1 6 (Leipzig 1858): 26- 38; End. Eth. vn. 10 1242 a 8 f . 
Zeller op. c. II ii 679 (i): Susemihl scriti- with Pol. ill. 6 35 1278 b 21 30, 
cal edition of the Politics XLIII n. (73). esp. 21 f., 25 f. See also Zeller \\\ Hermes 

8 7roXtrt/c7;s a/cpoacrews rj (so the Am- xv. 1880. 553 ^556, who compares End. 
brosian MS. discovered by Rose: see Eth. n. i. 1218 b 32 ff. with Pol. iv 

H. 2 


highly improbable, to say the least, that in the century (200 B.C. 101 
B.C.) which elapsed between Hermippos and Apellikon of Teos, the 
precursor of Tyrannion and Andronikos l , this older edition should have 
been so completely lost that the new editors had not a single copy 
of it at their disposal 2 , while it is equally incredible that they should 
intentionally have declined to use it. The exact agreement in the 
number of the books would undoubtedly render it a far more reasonable 
conclusion that except for the transposition, to which we have now 
no clue the new edition of this work differed much less from the old 
than was the case with some other Aristotelian writings. 

The first distinct traces of actual use of the treatise are next to be 
found in Cicero :i . It is true he did not use it directly 4 and the new 
recension of Andronikos was riot at the time in existence. Yet we are 
not obliged to assume that he drew from an earlier writer who availed 
himself of the former edition 5 : it is quite as conceivable that Tyrannion, 
with whom he was in frequent intercourse, may have provided him with 
extracts from the work suitable for his purpose, and these may have 
been his sources <! . Even when the new edition appeared, it found but 
few readers ; the traces of its use are extremely scanty 7 , and it is in 

(vn). i. 1323 a 23, b 1 8, b 27; and 
Eud. Eth. n. i. 1219 a 33 with Pol. iv 
(vn). 8. 5, 1328 a 35. 

1 See Strabo /. c., Plutarch /. c. 

- Polenaar op. cit. p. 78 finds no diffi 
culty in this. 

3 De fui. v. 4. n, ad Quint, fratr. ill. 
5. i, DC leg. in. 6. 14, DC rep. i. c. 25 
(comp. Pol. in. 9 n, 12, 6 3 f., i. 2 
9), c. 26 (cp. Pol. in. i i, 6 i, 
7 i, 2), c. 27 (cp. Pol. in. 9 i, 2, 
io $j 4, 5, n 6, 7, 1 6 2), c. 29 (cp. 
Pol. vi (iv). cc. 8, n). The doubts of 
Ileitz (op. c. 241), whether after all we 
get any real evidence from Cicero, are 
unreasonable in face of the quotation ad 
Quint, fr. 

4 See Zeller op. c. n ii 151 n. (6). 

5 So Zeller /. c. Whether the author 
of the Magna Moralia in i. 4, n84b 
33 f. shows any acquaintance with Politics 
iv (vn). 13. 5 Zeller rightly regards as 

6 Cp. ad Aft. iv. 4 b i, 8a i t adQit. 
fr. II. 4 2, in. 4 5, 5 6. 

7 Alexander of Aphrodisias On (he 
Metaphysics 15, 6 (ed. Eonitz) : Eubulos, 
a contemporary of Longinus, ETrto /cei/ is 
T(3v UTT ApiffTOTe\ovs ev Seirr^pco ruv TTO- 
\iriKWv wpbs TT]v HXdrw^os Tro\ireLav av- 
Teiprn^evwv ed. Mai Script, vet. nov. coll. 
Vat. n. 671 ff. : Julian Letter to The- 

inistios 260 D, 263 D : Scholia Aldina 
upon Aristoph. Acharn. 92, 980 : Scholia 
on Lucian Dream. 3 (eV Tre^Trroj) : Michael 
of Ephesus On the Nicom. Ethics fol. 
70 a, 1 86 a, 187!), 188 b, 189 a: Pseudo- 
Plutarch De nolnl. c. 6 932 i; ff., c. 8 
937 A ff.: Suidas and Pholios s.v. etr%a- 
Tiav : Eustathios On the Iliad p. 625, 36, 
p. 126, 12 ff . : De Thessal. nrbe p. 281, 
60 (ed. Tafel) : Theocloros Metochites 
jMisccll. 644, 667 (ed. Kiessling). Thus 
Dionysios of Halikarnassos in his descrip 
tion of the Greek aiav/j.vv)Teia, Roman 
Antiquities V. 73 has not used Aristotle 
in. 14 8, 9 as his authority, but the 
similar account in Theophrastos irepl /3a- 
(TtXems. In his critical edition, p. XLIV 
and note (82), Susemihl wrongly followed 
Spengel Arist. Stud. II. ,s7 n. (4) in 
maintaining that everything which Diony 
sios relates /. c. v. 73 f. exactly agrees 
with Aristotle in. i4f. , and consequently 
that Theophrastos irepl /SaatXetas is bor 
rowed altogether from Aristotle. Mean 
while Krohn, op. c. 47, pointed out cer 
tain essential differences, and Henkel, 
op. c. 3 note i, has more accurately ex 
plained where Theophrastos line of 
thought diverges and becomes original. 
Hence what Dionysios has here borrowed 
from Theophrastos could not have been 
derived from Aristotle. But this only 


keeping with their infrequency that we do not possess a single MS. 
of the Politics of earlier date than the fourteenth century. Amongst 
the Arabs it remained quite neglected. To the reading public of the 
west in the Christian middle age it was introduced by the Latin trans 
lation of the Dominican monk William of Moerbeke 1 : on the basis of 
his version Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas wrote commentaries 
to the work 2 . 


At the time when the Politics was first made known to mediaeval 
students, and for some centuries afterwards, the ground was not pre 
pared for a due appreciation of it. It was only by degrees, as the 
development of the modern state went on, that the treatise began to be 
rightly understood :! , until at last even in its present incomplete and 
fragmentary condition we have learnt to recognise in it the richest and 
greatest contribution of antiquity, or, allowing for the difference of 
the times, perhaps the greatest of all the works we have upon political 
science 1 . There is certainly no second work to be named in this 
field of enquiry which in a like degree displays the rare combination of 
statesmanlike intellect, a scholar s acquaintance with history, and the 
observation of a man of science, with the philosopher s systematic 
arrangement of phenomena and keen penetration into their inmost 
nature 5 . Marvellous student of human nature that he was, Aristotle, 
although never actually engaged in public affairs, has observed with all 
a statesman s shrewd sense the complicated political and social relations 

increases the improbability of Krohn s died 1280.] 

assertion mentioned p. 15 n. above, for On this subject generally see Oncken 

which these two passages are his sole /. c. I. 64 80. The first beginnings of 

authority, that Pol. III. 14 is an excerpt such an appreciation are to be found in 

from that very work of Theophrastos. Oresme : cp. Roscher in the Zeitschrift 

Compare the note on in. 14. 9 (624). f. d. Staatswissensch. xix. 1863. 305 ff. 

1 See above p. i. 4 Zeller op. c. II ii 753 f. Compare 

2 That of the two Thomas wrote his Bradley s admirable exposition in Hd- 
earlier than his master Albert, between Icnica (Oxford, 1880) 181 183. Lang is 
1261 and 1269, was the view of Jourdain certainly not far wrong when he remarks 
Recherches critiques sur Ics ancicnncs tra- in the Introductory Essays to Holland s 
ductions cTAristote 393 f., 456 (Paris 1819). translation of Bks. I. in. IV (vn) p. 15 
Nearly the whole text of the old Latin (London 1877. 8), Indeed, when we 
version was incorporated in the commen- come to analyse his method we find 
tary of Albert, who in this work imitated three incongruous elements, really scien- 
the method of his pupil. Cp. my critical tific enquiry, aristocratic prejudice, and 
edition VI nn. (4) & (5). [Von Hertling the dreams of a metaphysic which liter- 
in Rh. Mus. xxxix. 1884. 446 457 ally sublimi fcrit sidera verticc, and lis- 
argues that the question of relative pri- tens for the eternal harmonies of Na- 
ority cannot be decided, but that S. ture . This thought is worked out more 
Thomas left his commentary unfinished fully by Grant A ristoth 117 ff. 

at his death in 1274. Albertus Magnus 5 Zeller op. c. n ii 707, 708. 

2 2 


of his nation, and in part of other nations. He has analysed them with 
the cool indifference of the biologist, with the same unwearied calm and 
caution which characterize his treatises on natural science. The as 
tonishing store of information which he had amassed upon history in 
general and the special history of nearly all the Greek communities is 
here turned to the best account. At the same time there is diffused 
throughout the work a warm genial breath of philosophic and moral 
idealism, which, however closely allied to some of its defects, never 
theless reconciles us to certain harsh traits in it. From the writer s 
peculiar point of view however this very tendency to idealism, so far 
from softening such traits, serves only to bring them into stronger 
relief: so that every now and then we see the shrewd thinker, elsewhere 
so strictly logical, entangle himself in a network of contradictions. 
> The peculiarity of his point of view and therewith the distinctive 
importance of the work, historically and for all time to come, consists in 
this, that Aristotle alone with full and complete success has given 
expression in theory to the whole import of the Greek state and of 
Greek political life in all its bearings. The only limitation to this is 
the decided repugnance he manifests to certain political and social ideas, 
the outcome of that development of democracy, whereby we may fairly 
admit the Greek state to have been, so to speak, carried beyond itself. 
This success deserves to be all the more highly estimated in proportion 
as his position is in this respect unique. Certainly even before he 
wrote, not to mention Plato s trenchant dialogues, there was a literature 
it may be a tolerably large literature upon political, legal and 
social questions, as may be learnt from his own 1 and Plato s" cursory 
notices, although we know next to nothing else about these writers". 
The passages quoted show how many ideas deserving of consideration 
they had disclosed, but at the same time how far they fell short of the 
goal which Aristotle attained. Here again his dependence on Plato is 

] I. 3. 4 with n. (31), I. 6 i 5 (9 11 )- in man Y f the passages cited 

tin. (49!)) (50!)), i. 9. ii n. (88b), II. 6 above it is doubtful whether he means 

17 19 nn. (219) (221), n. 8. 16 statements in writing. See L. Stein s 

;/. (269), II. 9. 33 n. (342), n. 12 2 4 paper Greek theories of political science 

nil. (400) (404), in. 3. i ;/. (454), ill. 13. he/ore Aristotle and Plato in the Z.dt- 

ii n. (596), iv (vn). 2. 5ff., iv (vn). sell rift f. d. gcsammte Staatsivissensch. IX. 

6. i n. (770), iv (vn). 14. 16 n. (911), 1853. 115 182. 

vi (iv). i 5, 6 nn. (1118) (1123). - Laws i. 630 E, xn. 972 E. Cp. on 

Comp. also in. 4. 8 n. (476), vi (iv). 3. 7 the latter passage n. on ii. 6. 17 (219), 

n. (1158). To this list may be added on the former Hildenbrand op. cit. 395 

Phaleas n. 7, 12 12, Hippodamos II. 8, n. (2). 

Thimbron or Thibron, iv (vn). 14. 17 3 See Henkel s exhaustive collection of 

and perhaps Telekles vi (iv). 14. 4. n. facts Studien zur Geschichte der gricch. 

(1321). Aristotle makes no mention of Lehre vo/n Staat (Leipzig 1872, 8) p 2 ff . 
Xenophon : yet see ;/. on iv (vn). 14. 16 


evident; a dependence far greater than was once imagined or than 
might be expected from the severity of his polemical criticism, which is 
frequently, nay in most cases, successful. For firstly, Aristotle s criti 
cism touches what are merely external excrescences of the two pattern 
states sketched by Plato in the Republic and the Laws; enough of 
common ground still remains on which to raise his own design of an 
absolutely best constitution side by side with them 1 . Further, the Laws 
proves Plato by no means deficient in exact knowledge of Athenian 
public life ; while above all, his descriptions in the Republic of other 
constitutions besides the only perfect state , i.e. of the actually 
existing forms of government, suffice to show that he did not lack 
experience or penetration for judging of political conditions 2 . In 
short Aristotle is indebted to his master for numerous ideas in every 
department of political speculation :! . But it should not be forgotten 
how often these ideas in Plato are mere germs which only received 
a fruitful development at the hands of his disciple ; or random state 
ments which require to be demonstrated and expanded by Aristotle, 
and to be fitted into their place in the whole framework of his system, 
before their full scope is attained. When all has been deducted that can 
in any way be regarded as an inheritance from Plato, quite enough 
remains which Aristotle can claim for his very own. One great differ 
ence in the works of these two men is most characteristically pre- 
VVTierTTlato comes to deal with existing forms of government 

he depicts them in a rough and ready way; whereas Aristotle bestows 

1 I may refer to the notes on (192), 6 6 (201), 6 9 (206 b) (207), 
i. 13. 16 (F2 7 ) iv (vii). 6. 5 (774), 6 15 (215); 8 21 (273) (274), 3 25 
n. 5. 2 (153) iv (vii). 10. 13 (838), (277); 9 2 (279), 9 5 (283) (285), 
n. 5. 7 (158) iv (vn). 12. 2 (859), 9 ii (295 b), 9 13 (297), 9 20 (318), 
n. 5. 15 (166) iv (vii). 15. 10 (936), 9 25 (330), 9 27 (335), 9 31 (341), 
n. 6. 5 (192) iv (vii). 16. i (937), 9 34 (344) : 

n. 6. 10(208) iv (vii). 16. 12(944), Bk. III. 3 9 (466); 4 18 (499); 

n. 6. 15 (215) iv (vii). 16. 14 (945), 7 i (533); ii 19 (579); 16 2 (673), 

n. 7. 6 (236!)) iv (vn). 16. 15 (946), i6 ii (6^2): 

11.9.5(285) v (vin). 5. 4 (1024), Bk.IV(VII). 6 5 (774); 782(78.); 

ii. 9. 23 (325) v (vin). 5. 5 (1025) : 10 13 (838); 12 2 (859), 12 3 (860), 

also to Thurot Etudes sur Aristote 109 ff. 12 8 (866) (867) ; 14 13 (907), 14 14 

(Paris 1866. 8), Van cler Rest Platon ct (908); 15 10 (936); 16 i (937), 16 

Aristote 451 tt. (Bruxelles 1876. 8). 12 (944), 16 14 (945), 16 15 (946), 

2 Zeller 0/. c. ii i 783 (Eng. tr. Plato 16 17 (948); 17 r (050), 17 5 (950): 
p. 492). More precise details are given Bk. V (VIII). 4 2 (1006), 4 7 
in Steinhart Introductions to Plato s Works (1014), 4 9 (1015) (1016); 5 3 (1022); 
v. 238 ff., Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 226 ff. 6 2 (1064), 6 9 (1071) ; 7 9 (1105) : 

3 Reference may be permitted to the Bk. VI (IV). i i (1114); 2 3 
notes on the following passages : (i 139) (1140) : 

Bk. I. 2 2 . (5) ; 5 9 (46) ; 6 8 Bk. VII (VI). 2 3 (1391) : 

(54)5 9 18(93); 10 4 , 5 (98); n 6 Bk. VIII (V). 9 13 (1644); n 10 

(103); 13 12 (121), 13 16 (127): (1724) (1725), ii ii (1727), ii !2 

Bk. II. 5 i, 2 (153), 5 16 (167), (1729); 12 8 (1763), 12 9 ( 764)- 
5 17 (168), 5 1924 (172); 6 5 


he most affectionate care on explaining and reproducing their minutest 
details ; it is evident that he lingers over them involuntarily, as if they 
,vere his own peculiar province, with far greater pleasure and patience, 
n spite of his theories, than when he is treating of his own ideal state. 

From the point of view which has just been characterized the 
lorizon is to Aristotle necessarily limited. Here, too, it is to the 
imitation that he owes most of what he has in common with Plato 
upon this subject. In both, the close connexion of_ Politics with Ethics 
las a beneficial effect ; in both, it is a weakness that this connexion be 
comes, in genuine Greek fashion, too much like entire unity. Each 
of them recognises in the state itself the school of morality in the 
Greek sense of the word, as the harmonious development of all the 
powers with which individuals in different kind and degree have been 
endowed ; the preparation, therefore, for true human happiness. Only 
from this point can we explain the peculiar assumption, common to 
these two thinkers, of a pattern state to be specially constructed in 
contrast to all actually existing constitutions ; a state only possible 
amongst Hellenes as the most highly gifted race; in which the perfect 
citizen is also the perfect man 1 . Further, these two philosophers have 
no higher or more comprehensive conception of the state than as 
merely a Greek city-community, a canton with hamlets and villages: 
hence their ideal of a perfect state never really emerges from this narrow 
setting". Nay more, it is saddled with all the conditions of a small 
Greek city-state: slavery in the first place; depreciation of labour; con 
tempt for commerce, industry, and trade; and the peculiarly Greek con 
ception that leisure, to be devoted to the exclusive pursuit of the affairs 
of the state, and to the intellectual and moral culture of himself and 
his fellow-citizens, free from all compulsion to trouble about a living, 
is the only thing worthy of a true freeman ; a conception that to our 
present view savours strongly of idleness. Lastly this makes it neces 
sary that the minority, consisting of an exclusive body of full citizens, 
V should have a secure capital guaranteed to them 3 . 

-\ But there is this vast difference between Aristotle and Plato. By the 
- 1. latter this very limitation of the Greek city-community is carried to the 

1 T may refer the reader to the some- n. (19 b), n. 2. 3 (132), ill. 3. 4 (460). 
what daring but ingenious attempt of my Wilamowitz on the other hand endea- 
exccllent colleague Von \Vilamowitz-M6l- vours to show, op. c. no 113, that the 
lendorff Ans Kydathen 47 54 (Lerlin Athenian state of Cleisthenes and Peri- 
1880. 8) to trace the growth of this idea in cles, as it actually existed, was not really 
Plato and his predecessors, and the rise subject to this limitation. 

of political speculation generally, to the 3 See the notes on I. 9 18, 10 4, 

internal history of the Athenian people n 6, 13 13; II. 9 2, u 10; in. 

and state. 13 12 (599). 

2 Comp. on I. 2. 4 note (n), I. 2. 6 


extreme, and the state as it were forced back into the family, becoming / 
hinder the ideal constitution nothing but an expanded family. The 
ormer on the other hand gives all prominence to the conception of 
the state, so far as the above limitation allows; he is careful to draw the 
sharpest distinction between the state and the family at the very time when 
ic is demonstrating the true significance of the latter in relation to the 
brmer. This is made the starting-point not simply of his whole ex 
position, wherein at the outset he assumes a hostile attitude to Plato , 
3Ut in ii. 2 2, 7, of his attack upon Plato s ideal state in particular 2 . 
>By exploring, in all directions farther than did his master, the nature of 
(the Hellenic state, he has penetrated to the inmost essence cf the state 
(in general, of which this Hellenic state was at any rate an important 
embodiment. He has thus succeeded in discovering for all succeeding 
times a series of the most important laws of political and social life. 
Here first, for example, not in Plato, do we find the outlines of 
Political Economy. At the same time in this limitation of his point of 
view must be sought the reason why from the soundest premisses, from ; 
observations of fact most striking and profound, he not unfrequently 
deduces the most mistaken conclusions. 



The opening chapters, Bk. i. cc. i, 2, form the introduction to the 
work, and here we follow our author with undivided assent. In oppo 
sition to Plato he traces the origin of the family to a process of organic 
natural growth, and next shows how the state arises out of the family 
through the intermediate step of the clan-village 4 . At the same time 
he states what is the specific difference between the state and the 
family, and characterizes the former as the product of no arbitrary 
convention, but rather of a necessity arising from man s inner nature. 
He proclaims a truth as novel as it was important 5 that man, and 

^ See the notes on I. i 2, 3 4, 5 Van der Rest op. c. 372. That from 

7 i, 2. this proposition there follows for Avis- 

2 See further II. 3 4 4 10, 5 14 totle the natural right of slavery, as 
26 and note on II. 2. 2 (131). Oncken (op. c. n. 29 f.) maintains, is un- 

3 On this and the following sections deniable : yet he deduces it only by the 
comp. Susemihl op. cit. On the conipo- aid of his other assumptions. Oncken 
sition of the Politics 17 29. (p. 23) thinks no one would now subscribe 

4 Mommsen s account in the History the further proposition that he who is by 
of Rome, I c. 3, p. 37 ff. of the Eng. nature outside the state, aTroXis, is either 
trans. (London 1877. 8), may be com- exalted above humanity or a degraded 
pared. savage. I am of the contrary opinion ; 


properly speaking he alone of all creatures upon the earth, is a being 
destined by nature for political society. Nevertheless the actual com 
bination to form the state appears (see 2 15) to be man s own 
spontaneous act 1 , quite as much as the actual formation of poetry out 
of its germs in man s inner nature and the first rude attempts to de 
velop e them 2 . 

The expositions which form the first main division of the work, the 
theory of the household or family as the basis of the state (OLKOVO/^LKTJ I. 
cc. 3 13), make a mixed impression upon the reader: especially is this 
true of the account of slavery c. 4. ff. 

Besides (i) the view of those in favour of simple adherence to 
custom, who would maintain the existing slavery due to birth, purchase, 
or war, as perfectly justified, and (2) the more moderate view accepted 
by Plato, which pronounced against the extension of slavery to Hellenes 3 , 
Aristotle found a third theory already in the field which rejected all 
slavery as contrary to nature. However true in itself, this last-named 
theory was many centuries in advance of the age 4 ; and beyond all doubt 
its defenders had lightly passed over what was the main point, the 
possibility namely of making their principle a living reality at the time 5 . 
Either Plato was unacquainted with this view or he considered that it 
did not require to be refuted; in any case it was an axiom with him, 
that within the limits assigned slavery was justified. Thus Aristotle 
deserves unqualified approval for having been the first to appreciate the 

the proposition is just as true now as amongst Christian nations, one of the 

when Aristotle wrote it. most important having only been de- 

1 Hildenbrand op. cit. 393 f., Oncken stroyed by the recent civil war in North ^ 

op.cit. n. i8f. Comp. ;/. on I. 2. 15 America; that serfdom was but lately ^ 

(28 b). abolished in Russia, and the last rem- ^ 

- Poet. c. 4 i 6. nants of it in Germany were not removed ^j/ 

3 See on I. 5 9 n. (46), 6 8 (54). until the present century. [If the status (jf 

4 Even in the time of the Roman em- of slavery is not tolerated openly in Chris- ^ . 
pi re voices like Seneca s remained un- tenclom, there is much analogy to it in the *r 
supported. The whole order of ancient position of uncivilized tribes in relation 
society was once for all established on to European peoples in colonial settle- 
the basis of slavery, and even Christianity, ments, e.g. that of the South- African 
although it contained in itself the prin- natives to the Boers, under the guise 
ciple which must lead to its extinction, of indenture. But the system of labour 
could make no alteration for the time recruiting in the Western Pacific for 
being. The primitive Christian Church Queensland and Fiji, even assuming that 
may have indirectly prepared for the no irregularities occur, and the coolie 
abolition of slavery (see Lecky History of traffic generally (whether in English, 
Rationalism n. 258 ff.), but it was directly French, or Spanish possessions) have 
hostile to^such a change. See for proof equally the effect of placing ignorant and 
and elucidation of this statement L. unprotected natives entirely at the mercy 
Schiller Die Lchre des Aristoteles von dcr of their employers, and that, too, in a 
Sklaverd 3 ff. (Erlangen 1847. 4) and strange country. 11. w. j.] 

Oncken op. cit. II. 6074. It should be 5 So Hildenbrand rightly thinks op. c. 

remembered that even now all the traces 40=;. 
of slavery have not as yet disappeared 


difficulties of the question in their full extent. But a successful solution 
of it was for him impossible. With a clear and true insight he saw 
that the theory referred to could not practically be carried out in the 
Greek state; a higher conception of the state, as we have said, he 
neither did nor could possess. It was inevitable that this insight should 
mislead him into the belief that the view itself was theoretically incor 
rect: that he should honestly endeavour to find scientific grounds for this 
belief of his, is entirely to his credit. It was just as inevitable that the 
attempt merely involved him in self-contradictions, and indeed resulted 
in the proof of the exact opposite 1 . In substance he decides in favour 
of a view similar to Plato s, which he more exactly determines and modi 
fies by saying that there are certain slaves by nature who are to be 
sought for amongst non-Hellenes, and that none but these ought actu 
ally to be enslaved". The thought that slavery is incompatible with 
the dignity of man has occurred to him as well as to the unconditional 
opponents of the institution, but not as yet the thought of the univers- 
ality of man s dignity 3 . In contradiction to his own psychological 
principles he makes the difference between the most perfect and the 
least perfect of men as great as that between man and beast, and thinks 
that thereby he has theoretically discovered his slaves by nature. But 
he has himself to admit that there is no certain practical criterion by 
which to distinguish these men from others. It is quite possible that 
a slave s soul may dwell in a nobly formed body, and the soul of one of 
nature s freemen in an ignoble frame; furthermore men of truly free 
and noble mind may be born amongst the non-Hellenes, or men of 
servile nature amongst the Hellenes. The consequence is that the 
criterion of Hellenic birth, to which on the whole Aristotle adheres, 
ought not to serve as an unconditional protection against well deserved 
slavery 4 . These, he thinks, are only exceptions to the rule; but he 
cannot deny that these exceptions are numerous ; and yet he does not 
observe, that therefore of necessity there must be many cases where 
slavery as it actually exists is in perpetual conflict with the law of 
nature, even as laid down by himself. His remarks on the need of 
domestic servants for the house, and on the natural antithesis of ruler 
and subject pervading all relations of existence are clear and striking; 
but they by no means warrant the conclusion that these servants must 
at the same time be slaves or serfs 5 . Yet in all fairness it ought to 

1 See on I. 4 2, 5 8, 9 n. (45), 3 Hildenbrand op.cit. 404 f. 

6 3, 8 . (55), 9 . (56), 10 n. (57). 4 Comp. the notes on I. 6 9 (56), 

Compare also the notes on I. 4 5, 13 and 6 3 (50). 

12. 5 See the notes on I. 5 8 (43) and 

2 Comp. the notes on I. 5 10 (47), 5 9 (45). 
6 8 (54). 


be borne in mind not merely that the Fathers of the early Church used 
arguments in favour of slavery which are no better 1 , but that in all ages 
attempts have been made to justify serfdom or slavery by similar falla 
cies 2 . Nay more, Aristotle s arguments, when properly qualified, are 
well suited to become the subject of grave consideration even in 
our own day ; to make us aware of contradictions in our present views ; 
and thus to suggest some modest restraint upon a too vehement 
criticism of the great thinker of antiquity. Or does the conviction, 
which is forced upon us by experience, that whole races of men lack 
the capacity for civilization, so readily accord with our belief, no less 
well founded, in the dignity of human nature everywhere? And does 
the interval between the lowest individual of such a race and the great 
est spirits of humanity really fall far short of that which separates man 
from the animals? If lastly it is not to be denied, that even within the 
pale of civilized nations Providence ensures the necessary distinction 
between some men adapted to physical toil and others who are suited 
to intellectual exertion, should we not be as perplexed as Aristotle if 
we were required to set up a valid criterion between the two sorts of 
natures? As a matter of fact he who has to live by the labour of his 
hands will always be debarred from that complete participation in 
political life which constitutes the citizen proper. Even the edu 
cated man of our own day is so fully occupied with the discharge of 
his professional duties that frequently he has no time to take that share 
in politics which the modern state, if it is to prosper, is obliged to 
demand from him 3 . 

The more general discussions on production and property 4 which 
follow the investigation into slavery, i. 8 u, cannot be said to be 
attached to it in a fairly systematic manner ", but on the contrary 
quite loosely and lightly 6 . It is open to question, however, whether the 
passage which we must in all probability assume to be lost a little 
further on (i. 12. i) did not originally supplement and complete the 
requisite organic connexion of these discussions with the theory of the 
family as a whole 7 . 

1 Oncken op. cit. II. 73 f. under one or the other of these two 

2 Oncken op. cit. n. 38. divisions. But it is convenient to retain 
:{ On this subject see some remarks of the established technical term in English 

Lang, op. c. 60, and Bradley op. c. 215^, treatises on Political Economy, viz. Pro- 
si 7 f., which are quoted in the notes on duction , that is, production of wealth. 
I. 5, 10 (47) and in. 5. 7 (511). TR.] 

4 [Both are included under xp^ario-rt/o;. 5 As Teichmiiller asserts Die Einheit 

The Greek /cr?7<m and the German Er- der aristotdischcn Euddmonie 148 (St 

werb more properly mean Acquisition . Petersburg 1859. 8). 

Plato indeed, Soph. 219 c, D, opposes (i Zeller op. r. 1111693. 

r) to iroirjTiKr), classing all the arts 7 See on I. 12. i n. (107). 


However that may be, certain it is that the principle of exclusive 
slave labour, which Aristotle has adopted, has robbed his economic 
theory of precisely that which must be taken to be the soul of the 
modern science, the conception of economic labour. It has already been 
remarked that he cannot help sharing to the full the national prejudice 
of Greece against all industrial labour as something degrading and servile. 
As Oncken in particular has excellently pointed out 1 , his sort of dis 
tinction between direct or natural production and indirect acquisition 
by means of exchange, and further between the subdivisions of the two 
species, derives its peculiar colouring from this defect. The axiom 
that man must consider himself the born proprietor of all the treasures 
of the earth, we also hold to be true ; and the proposition, which Aris 
totle is fond of repeating and which we meet with once more here, that 
nature makes nothing in vain, should continue to be respected in spite 
of the thorough-going or half-and-half materialism of our times. But 
one essential side of man s relation to his planet and to the rest of its 
productions and inhabitants has escaped Aristotle altogether : of the 
important part borne by labour in determining this relation he knows 
nothing: in common with all the ancients he lacked the idea of the 
gradual acquisition of command over nature and of the gradual unfold 
ing of human culture which accompanies it step by step. Hence it is 
that he has no presentiment of the epoch-making importance of agricul 
ture as the transition to a settled life; he sets this occupation completely 
on a level with that of the nomad, the hunter, or the fisherman. He 
does not separate settled cattle-breeding from the pastoral life of the 
herdsman who wanders without a home ; nor does he bring it into in 
separable connexion, as he should do, with agriculture 13 . Agriculture 
moreover, he thinks, can be carried on by slaves just like other trades 3 , 
and the owner of a piece of ground tilled in this way stands to the 
fruits of the earth in much the same relation as the herdsman, the 
hunter and fisherman. He gets them ready made into his hands, and 
with even less trouble than they do: thus the notion of individual 
labour, of personal acquisition in agriculture, falls into the background 
in Aristotle s view. And this explains the gross inexactitude in his 
* notion of property, which is disclosed when he treats plunder as a 
further natural species of production standing on the same footing with 
the former species. Besides, in so doing he overlooks the fact that 

1 op.cit. II. 75 114: whence the pas- ov8 dei yecopyovs elvai, 8 dvayKaiov tlvai. 
sages with quotation marks are taken. robs yewpyovs dovXovs r/ j3ap@dpovs [77] ?re- 

2 Cp. also on vil (vi). 4. n n. (1422). ptot/cous: 10 9 13: further Exc. ill. on 

3 See IV (vil). 9 3, 4 ovre [3dvav<rov Bk. I and ;/. (282) on II. 9. 4. 
j3iov otfr dyopaioi> 5fi TJV roi)s TroXtras... 


plunder by its very nature cannot possibly be included, as it is by him, 
with direct appropriation of the gifts of nature as distinct from sale and 
barter, that is, from every kind of voluntary exchange : for it is nothing 
else than the transfer of property in the rudest form by violence and with 
out compensation. Whoever then regards the most violent form of this 
transfer as natural would be bound in all fairness to hold the same of its 
milder forms, fraud and theft. Nothing but personal labour creates a 
valid and incontestable right to property, and such a right over the soil 
can only be won by the plough. Thus Aristotle can make an excellent 
defence of the utility of property against Plato and can set it in its true 
light; but missing the conception of economic labour he misses therewith 
the full and logically clear notion of property. His notion too of what 
is natural must under such circumstances lose all definiteness when it 
comes to be applied to civilized nations in advanced stages of develop 
ment. He certainly never intended to concede to plunder a place in 
his model state; but he is exposed to the charge of inconsistency, when 
he nevertheless declares it to be something natural on the ground that 
it undoubtedly is so to men in a state of nature, without seeing that what 
is natural for men in a state of nature is not natural for civilized men 1 . 
Indeed he has in general no sort of insight into the nature of historical 
development ; for in history he discerns, not the reign of general laws, 
but merely the action of individual men, free or even capricious, 
although often wrecked on circumstances. 

When he comes to treat of exchange, not merely do we find Adam 
Smith s distinction between value in use and value in exchange already 
anticipated 2 , but the whole discussion is evidence how acutely Aristotle 
has thought out a subject which Hellenic philosophy before him 
seems at the best to have barely touched. The successive steps in 
the rise of commerce and the origin of money could not be exhibited 
1 with more of truth to fact or of historical accuracy than has been here 
accomplished in a style of unerring precision, piercing to the heart of 
the subject to reproduce it with classic brevity and defmiteness, yet so 
exhaustively that modern science has found nothing to alter or to 
1 add. Besides admitting that exchange of commodities is not con 
trary to nature he goes on to show how from it buying and selling 
necessarily arose, and from that again a new mode of acquisition, 
trade in merchandise. Apparently he would further allow exchange to 
be carried on through a coined medium, so long as it is merely to 
relieve indispensable barter and not as a business of its own. But here 
comes in again his want of clearness and that inconsistency which leads 

1 See on I. 8. 7 n. (71) and I. 9. 8 . (82). - Van cler Rest op. c. p. 382. 


him to see an ever increasing degeneracy and departure from the paths 
of nature 1 in what he himself recognises as a necessary development : 
starting with the most accurate views on the nature and necessity 
of monetary exchange he is led in the end actually to reject all com- 
merce and all practical trading with capital. He rightly sees how 
essential it is that the article chosen as the medium of exchange 
should be useful in itself ", but at the same time as the determinate 
value of each coin is regulated by law and convention he is misled into 
the belief that nothing but pure caprice has a hand in this convention : 
that it was by mere chance that metals have been selected out of 
all useful articles, and in particular that amongst all the more highly 
civili/ed nations gold and silver are exclusively employed for coining into 
money, at all events for foreign trade. Once for all he states the case 
in such a way that it might easily be believed he has come, a few lines 
further on, in contradiction to himself, to hold that coined money no 
longer current loses even its value as a metal :i . 

Further, while correctly explaining the origin of money, he never 
theless fails to recognise to the full extent the way in which its intro- 
duction must naturally react upon the value of natural products : how 
they are all without exception thereby turned into wares, whose value 
is regulated by their market-price, so that anything which finds no 
market, or no sale in the market, possesses no more value than heaps 
of gold on a desert island ; the richest harvest of the productions 
of nature, if its abundance does not attract a purchaser, being just as 
useless rubbish as the wealth called into existence by Midas . After 
the later stage of a monetary system has been attained Aristotle makes 
the vain attempt to preserve in his conceptions the primitive economy 
of nature, which has come to an end simply because it has become 
impossible. In the business of the merchant he sees no more than 
what lies on the surface, speculation, money-making, the accumulation 
of capital : accordingly he condemns it as a purely artificial and 
unnatural pursuit. There too he overlooks the mental labour, 
the economic service which trade renders, not by any means ex- 
clusively to benefit the purses of those engaged in it. The insatiate 
nature of unscrupulous avarice he opposes in most forcible language, 
but it is in vain that he endeavours to restrict productive labour in 
domestic economy within any other limits than those which are set 
by the powers and conscience of the individual 5 . Of industry as 

1 See on I. 9. 8 n. (82). 4 Cp. on i. 9. n n. (88). 

2 See on I. 9. 8 n. (84). 5 Comp. the notes on I. 9 13 (90), 

3 But see on the other hand the note 18 (93). 
on I. 9. ii (87). 


understood in Political Economy he has no more conception than 
of labour. Having failed to recognise the importance of agriculture in 
human development he now mistakes still more the benefits introduced 
by property, which money first made really capable of transfer, that 
second great victory in the struggle between human labour and the 
forces of nature 1 . To this great democratic revolution it is impossible 
to accommodate his thoroughly aristocratic economic theory, which, 
at the expense of toiling slaves and resident aliens, guarantees in true 
Hellenic fashion to the handful of privileged citizens their leisure and 
the secure provision of their subsistence from their family estates, so that 
in fact they need take no trouble to increase their possessions. Aris- 
totle s freeholder, in Oncken s words, is not a producer at all, but 
consumes what is given by nature. Aristotle has no insight into the 
true natural law of economic development, the aim of which is to 
overcome nature by freeing industrial life from the vicissitudes of her 
smile and frown. Of the importance herein attaching to capital 
antiquity generally and the middle age never had an inkling; as little 
did they perceive that to receive interest on capital is not really different 
from selling the produce of labour. On the perverse view which Aris 
totle took of money" it is intelligible, that in accord with all ancient 
philosophy and the whole of the middle age 3 , he declares lending money 
upon interest to be the most shameful of all modes of gain ; yet it is 
certainly true on the other hand that the free community of antiquity 
was in reality nothing but an association of capitalists who lived on 
the interest of the capital they had invested in their slaves. 

Lastly, it is interesting to see how inconsistent this whole economic 
theory becomes when it passes over to the practical part . What is 
here (i. n ^ i, 2) described as the most natural mode of life is nothing 
but cattle-raising and tillage pure and simple on a large scale, which is 
impossible without considerable capital, an industrial spirit and a know 
ledge of the market. Consequently the separation which Aristotle has 
made between artificial and natural modes of life cannot be strictly 
maintained even in the case of those who rear cattle and till the soil, 
for whom nature herself, in the strictest sense of the word, provides a 
field of labour. He proves in his own case the truth of his profound 
remark made in this same connexion : that in all such matters, while 
speculation is free, practice has its necessary restrictions. It is no less 
noteworthy that in his economic theory he completely loses sight of that 

1 Cp. n. on I. 9. 1 8 (93). Lang op. c. 59. [See however Cunning- 

- Cp. nn. on I. 10 4, 5. ham Christian Opinion on Usury pp. 

3 Comp. Lecky op. c. n. 277289, 2633, 36 (Edinburgh 1884).] 


essential distinction between the family and the state upon which he 
insists so much elsewhere. Several times in these discussions he men 
tions the TroAm/cos who controls the finances of a state as well as the 
OIKOPOJUOS who manages the property of a household, and that too in a 
way which forces the reader to assume that the task and the proce- 
dure in both cases are completely similar : i. 8 ^ 13 15, 10 i$ i 3, 
ii ii. With this agrees the decided irony 1 with which he speaks of 
those statesmen whose whole political wisdom lies in their financial 
devices, while these devices amount to nothing but keeping the state 
coffers constantly filled by all kinds of monopolies. And yet the great 
revolution caused by the necessity of exchange he has deduced with 
perfect correctness from the fact that entirely new conditions of life 
and of production arise as soon as ever a single family developes into a 
1 circle of several families (i. 9. 5). What changes then are to be antici- 
pated when small communities coalesce into a political unity ; when 
intercourse springs up between different political bodies and reacts in 
a modifying and transforming manner upon the internal condition of 
each of them ! Had Aristotle gone into this question the untenable- 
ness of his economic theory would have been made even more glaringly 
manifest than is at present the case. 

In the last chapter of the first book, when Aristotle conies to enquire 
into the treatment of the slave and his capacity for virtue, his peculiar 
view of natural slavery involves him in an awkward dilemma, from which 
he cannot be said to have escaped very happily. The slave by nature 
to a certain extent remains a human being, and yet again to a certain 
extent he has, properly speaking, ceased to be one. On the one 
hand Aristotle demands that there should be a specific difference, and 
not merely one of degree, between the virtue (apery} of the man, the 
woman, the child, and the slave (e.g. 13 4, 5). On the other, his own 
subsequent elaborate enquiry into ethical virtue 2 ; as soon as the question 
is started, wherein consists the distinction between the virtue which 
commands and the virtue which obeys, tends far more to a mere 
quantitative variation than to really distinct species 3 to say nothing of 
the further question, wherein the obedience of the wife differs from that 
of the child, and both from that of the slave. And this is not the only 
defect which this enquiry displays 4 . 

1 Strangely misunderstood by Chicken " On the way in which Aristotle dis- 

/. c. II. 113, who in consequence unjustly tinguishes intellectual from moral excel- 

accuses Aristotle of a fresh contradic- lence see on I. 13. 6 . (112). 

tion here. While admitting that many 3 Van der Rest op. c. 378. Comp. also 

states need such devices, Aristotle does nn. on I. 13 7 (114!)) and on 11 13 

not thereby imply that he thinks this a (120 122). 

proof of the excellence of such states. 4 See the nn. on i. 13. 12. 




With the second book we come at once to the theory of the state 
properly so called; divided, according to Aristotle s own statement, 
into two parts which treat (i) of the constitution, and (2) of legislation. 
From two passages in the later books, in. 15 2, vi (iv). i 9, 10, 
it is unquestionable that the philosopher intended to treat of both in 
his work ; but in the form in which it has come down to us it has not 
advanced beyond the former, and even of this considerable sections are 

The second book more especially constitutes the critical part, the 
remainder of the work the positive or dogmatic part, of the theory of 
the constitution. In the former is contained an examination of the 
model constitutions proposed by other theorists, Plato, Phaleas, and 
Hippodamos, as well as of the best amongst the forms of government 
actually established, Sparta, Crete, Carthage, and the Solonian con 
stitution ; a criticism which of course gives us glimpses 2 of many of the 
positive features of Aristotle s own ideal of a constitution. His attack 
upon the polity of pure reason, as it claims to be, in Plato s Repub 
lic ranks among the most successful parts of the whole work. In 
a higher degree perhaps than anywhere else is here displayed the 
philosopher s practical sense, his clear eye open to the conditions 
and laws of the actual, his profound comprehension of human 
* nature and of political and domestic life 3 / Against every form of 
socialism and communism it remains unrivalled in cogency up to the 
present day. All the well meaning attempts that have been made to 
defend Plato against this criticism 4 have disclosed very little that will 

1 If this sense could be disputed for the 4 The oldest attempt of this kind 
latter passage, the former at all events known to us is that of the Neo-Platonist 
excludes all objection. Cp. the notes on Eubulos, mentioned above p. 18 n. 7. It 
these passages, (636) and (1130); also has been submitted to an examination in 
Ilildenbrand op. c. 351 f., Zeller op. c. detail by Ehrlich De iudicio ab Aristotele 
n ii 677. de republica Platonica facto (Halle 1868. 

2 See n. 5 7. (158), 15 n. (\C6], 8). Amongst the moderns similar at- 
17 n. (168), 25 n. (182) : 6 7 ff. . tempts have been partially made by Ca- 
(207), 10 14 nn. (208 211), 16 merarius, J. G. Schneider, &c. ; more 
19 nn. (216 219), 22 n. (230) : 7 5 thoroughly by Schlosser, who displayed a 
nn. (234, 236), 6 f. nn. (236 b, 237 b) : singular and singularly unfortunate zeal 

9 2 n. (279), 5 n. (285) 14 n. (300), against Aristotle; much more moderately 
i8. (313), 30 n. (339), 31 n. (341): and impartially by Fiilleborn ; lastly by 

10 8 n. (365), 9 . (368) : ii 3 . Pinzger De Us quac Aristotdes in Pla- 
(381), 4 n. (383), 6 . (388), 7 n. tonis politia rcprchendit (Leipzig 1822. 8). 
(391), 10 n. (393), 15 : 12 5 n. (413). These have also been answered by Ehr- 

3 Zeller op. c. 1 1 ii 697 f. lich, as well as by other writers. 


o o 

stand proof; nor have the charges of sophistry brought against it been 
to any extent successfully made out 1 . Only this much is true, that 
however forcible this criticism is in general it nevertheless contains 
misapprehensions in particulars, some of which are very serious 2 ; and 
its author had not the power, if indeed he ever had the will, to transfer 
himself to the innermost groove of Plato s thought 3 . 

These defects stand out far more forcibly when in the following 
chapter he treats of the state described in Plato s Laws. Upon this 
criticism we cannot pronounce a judgment by any means so favourable : 
indeed it contains some things which are all but incomprehensible 4 . 
Even the refutation of community of goods has not altogether that 
full cogency, derived from the essential nature of the case, which is 
apparent in the refutation of community of wives and children 5 . As 
we see from this criticism, and yet more clearly from that upon 
Phaleas, 7 6 f , Aristotle is himself in favour of considerable restrictions 
upon the rights of property . Every difference of principle in this 
respect between his own ideal state and Plato s in the Laws disappears : 
when all things are taken into account Aristotle is no further removed 
from Plato s first ideal state in the one than Plato himself in the other 7 . 
Here, therefore, Aristotle s criticism can only affect what are rela 
tively subordinate points, and under these circumstances it frequently 
assumes a petty and generally unfair character 8 . The refutation of 

1 See on n. 2 4 (133), 3 9 (142) : such a spirit of fraternity that we willing- 
4 i (145), 2 (i 4 6) (147), 9(151) ly grant our fellow-citizens a share in the 
(152): 5 3 (154), 10 (162), 16 (167), enjoyment of our own possessions, is in- 
2023 (172), 25 (181) (182), 27 comprehensible. 

(184). 7 It is much to be regretted that all com- 

2 See on II. 5 17 (i 68), 19 (170), 24 parisons between the ideal states of Plato 
(!79)> 27 (184) : 6 3 (187) (189) ; also andAristotle such as Brock er/WzVzV<w*#z, 
on 5 22 (177), 6 5 (195). quae docnerunt Plato et Aristotdes, disqtd- 

3 See Zeller Plat Stiidien 203 ff. (Tii- sitio et comparatio (Leipzig 1824. 8), 
bingen 1839. 8). Orges Comparatio Platonis et Aristotelis 

4 Even Zeller and Oncken do not seem librontm de rcpublica (Berlin 1843. 8), 
as yet to have observed this difference. Pierson Vergleichende Charakteristik der 
It was fully recognised by Van der Rest Platonischen und der Aristotclischen An- 
op. c. 108 ff., 121 f., 221 ff., 348 ff.: but he sicht vom Staate in the Rhcin. Mus. xin. 
did not investigate its causes, and in one 1858. i 48, 209 247, Rassow Die 
particular he should be corrected by the Republik des Plato und der beste Staat 
notes on n. 5. 25. It would be quite des Aristoteles (Weimar 1866. 4) have 
possible to suspect with Krohn (see p. 14 either been expressly confined to the 
n. 4) that, wholly or in part, c. 6 is not ideal state of the Republic, or, being left 
genuine. But it is hard to see who but incomplete, contain no sort of collection 
Aristotle could have written 10 15, of the similarities and differences between 
and scarcely anywhere are the difficulties the political ideal of the Laws and that 
greater. See the notes on these sections. of Aristotle. See further the notes on I. 

5 See on n. 5. 5. 13 16 : n. 6 5 (192), 6 (201), 14 

6 See on n. 5 7 n. (158), 15 n. (212); 7 5 (234), 6 (236 b) ; 9 5 
(166), 76w. (236 b). How Van der Rest (285) : iv (vii). 16 15. 

op. c. 349 can blame Aristotle for requiring 8 See the notes on n. 6 3 (188) (189), 
the public education to aim at creating 4 (190), 5 (192) (193), 6 (201), 7 

H. 3 


Phaleas, again, is enriched with the fruits of extensive observation of 
mankind; but, like the review of Plato s Laws, it leaves untouched 
the kernel of the matter, the inalienability and indivisibility of the 
equal portions of land allotted to the citizens. Furthermore Aris 
totle sees with keen perception that if this measure is to be carried 
out, a normal number of births and deaths must be calculated and the 
surplus population, on the basis of this calculation, removed by a resort 
to abortion, in order that the number of citizens may always remain the 
same. Nor has he any scruples about recommending this horrible 
measure and thus invading far more than Phaleas, or Plato in the Laws, 
the sanctities of marriage and family life \ What he further insists upon 
in reply to Phaleas is the same thing which he had already insisted 
upon when criticizing Plato (c. 5 15), namely that uniformity of 
education of the right kind is the main point, while all the other insti 
tutions have only a subsidiary importance 2 . 

We may admit then with Oncken 3 that Aristotle belonged to the 
few privileged spirits of antiquity who were the pioneers of progress 
towards that richer and riper humanity which remained foreign to the 
heathen world at large. In defending the natural law of marriage 
and private property he first discovered the fundamental laws of 
the independent life of the community : the position which he assigns 
to women goes far beyond the Hellenic point of view : and he was 
the first who, by adjustment of the unity of the state to the freedom 
of its citizens, at least attempted to determine the limits of the state s 
activity. But we must also bring out more forcibly than Oncken has 
done how far, even in Aristotle, all these great conceptions fall short of 
attaining their clear full logical development to important results. And 
the review of Hippodamos shows us how little, after all, he was dis 
posed, or even qualified, to follow ideas even then not unknown to 
Greek antiquity, the tendency of which was by a sharper limitation 
of the field of law and justice so to break the omnipotence of the 
state that its legislation should be confined to the maintenance of 
justice within these limits; this, rather than education, being made 
its function 4 . Here, as in the defence of slavery, we see that along 
with the excesses of democracy Aristotle rejected many just concep 
tions which had grown out of it 5 . However much to the purpose the 

(204), 9 (206 h), 10 (208), 13 (210), (238). 

14 (212), 15 (213215), 18 (220), 3 op. c. I. 191 f. 

1 9 ( 22 5 22 7)- 4 See the Excursus II on Hippodamos 

1 See nn. on n. 6 5 (192), ro (208), at the end of Bk. n. 

12, 13(209) (210), 7 5 (234). 5 g ee a bove p. 20; and further the 

3 See nn. II. 5 15 (165 b), 7 8 Excursus on Hippodamos just cited. 


objections which he brings against Hippodamos with regard to his 
division of the civic body 1 , they are defective from the jurist s point of 
view 2 ; while he makes not a single attempt to refute what is the real 
foundation of the whole scheme, the need for the restriction upon 
legislation described above. Evidently he thinks it not worth while to 
do so, just as in a later passage (in. 9. 8) he treats every opinion on the 
function of the state which implies such a mode of regarding legislation 
as ipso facto disproved. 

The review of the political institutions of Sparta, Crete, and 
Carthage is primarily of great historical value for our knowledge of 
their constitutions 3 : indeed apart from it we should know next to 

1 Compare the notes on n. 8 i (253), 
9 (264), 24 (276): but on the other 
hand II. 8 12 n. ^265). 

2 See the notes on n. 8 5 (258), 15 

3 Trieber Forschungen znr spartan- 
ischen Verfassungsgeschichte 99 f. (Berlin 
1871. 8) endeavours to prove that, in his 
account of Sparta and Crete, Aristotle 
chiefly followed Ephoros. Here I in the 
main agreed with him in my critical 
edition p. LXII f. , with considerable quali 
fications however in regard to Sparta. 
Meanwhile Gilbert Studien znr altspar- 
tanischen Geschichte pp. 86 109 (Got- 
tingen 1872. 8) endeavoured to show that 
on the contrary Ephoros made use of the 
Polities of Aristotle. Frick in the Jahrb. 
fur PJiilol. cv. 1872 p. 65 7 made reply to 
him that Ephoros work, as is well known, 
only went down to the year 340 B.C. (It 
would have been more correct if he had 
said to 355 : for all that follows was added 
by Demophilos, the son of Ephoros, 
probably after his father s death.) But it 
can be proved that Aristotle wrote at 
his Polities as late as 331, and for the 
proof Frick refers to Miiller Fragm. hist. 
Gr. II p. 121. Both Gilbert and Frick 
ought to have known that, from the dates 
there quoted by Miiller on the authority 
of Meier, Rose Arisloteles psendepigrapJms 
p. 397 ff. had with far greater reason 
inferred that the IIoAirercu did not ap 
pear until the period between the years 
318 and 307, and further that it is only 
on account of the uncertainty of the dates 
themselves that Heitz Die verlorenen 
Schriften des Aristoteles (Leipzig 1865. 
8.) p. 247 sq., Aristot. fragm. (p. 242 in 
the Paris edition of Aristotle), rejects this 
inference. Even if Rose is right we should 
conclude from this, not as he does, that 
Aristotle cannot have been the true au 

thor, but only that the work was first pub 
lished after his death with additions by 
the editor. For the genuineness of the 
groundwork at least has been sufficiently 
made out by Ileitz and by Bergk Zur 
Aristotelischen Politic der Athcncr (On a 
fragment of the Politics found lately, 
treating of Athens), in the Rhein. Ahis. 
xxxvi. 1881. 87 115: cp. Susemihl in 
Bnrsian^s Jahrcsber. xxx. 1882. 20 22. 
If the matter rested thus Gilbert would be 
completely refuted. But leaving the cor 
rectness of these dates an open question, 
it is not very probable, to say the least, 
that Aristotle should have published 
thus early a work like the IIoAtrercu 
based upon such comprehensive studies. 
On another side Oncken op.c. II p. 330 f, 
by the help of fragments of this work 
which we still possess on the Polity of 
Lacedaemon, has tried to prove that 
Aristotle, quite independently of Epho 
ros, was the first to investigate Spartan 
constitutional history in true scientific 
spirit ; that he probably visited Sparta 
himself for this purpose and drew infor 
mation there from living oral tradition. 
The difficulties in connexion with this 
hypothesis are patent, and with reference 
to Crete at any rate the coincidence be 
tween Aristotle and Ephoros is of such a 
kind that in accordance with the line 
of argument above Aristotle must have 
used either Ephoros or his authority : 
see the notes on n. 10 i (351), 2 (352, 
354), 5 (359). 6 (360)- Even with 
reference to Sparta hardly any other con 
clusion seems possible : see the notes on 
ii. 9 17 (310) ; 10 i, 2 (352, 354), 

5 (359) : vnl ( v )- i I0 ( J 498), 7 2 
(1592), n 3 (1710), 12 12 (1771), 
and compare Rose op. cit. 398, 490. 
Only we are not to infer from this that 
Ephoros was Aristotle s only authority 



nothing of the Carthaginian constitution : moreover we are bound on the 
whole to subscribe to Aristotle s estimate of them 1 . We shall not ven 
ture however to rank his merits quite so highly as Oncken has done. 
Certainly there never was before so mercilessly destructive and yet so 
just a criticism upon that Spartan state which up till then had been, 
most unwarrantably, the idol of all aristocratic and oligarchical circles. 
Yet on the one hand we must remember that close as were his 
relations with those circles, and although in essentials his own pattern- 
states were based upon similar foundations, Plato had been by no means 
blind to the defects of the Cretan and Spartan constitutions. Indeed 
in important particulars, and even in those of the greatest importance, 
Aristotle can but repeat the censure pronounced by his master 2 . On 
the other hand it is really necessary to reflect how, after so crushing 
a criticism which leaves scarcely anything untouched, Aristotle can 
possibly still be content, like Plato, to pronounce the Cretan and 
here. On the contrary while it is more banefulness? And the procedure which 

than doubtful whether he has Ephoros 
in view when he quotes certain opinions 
and statements (see on 11. 6. i7 ? n. 9- 
n), it is quite certain that in regard 
to both states Aristotle diverges consi 
derably in details from Ephoros, partly 
indeed from all other authorities. This 
divergence must be due to another source, 
and here and there to one which he alone 
has utilized : see on II. 10 6 (360), 10 
(369) : VI (iv). ii 15 (*30i). 

1 In spite of Oncken s opposition it 
will still remain the universal belief that 
the picture which Aristotle draws of the 
condition of Sparta agrees fully and com 
pletely only with the Sparta of later 
times. But the extreme view that this 
description in no respect applies to the 
Sparta of the earlier times should perhaps 
be modified. What is to be said, for in 
stance, when Trieber op. cit. p. 136 ff. 
actually praises Aristotle for having in 
his criticism of the Spartan constitution 
taken into account simply the existing 
historical relations of his age, thereby ful 
filling a condition laid down generally by 
the science of history in our time ; while 
at the same time he would fain persuade 
us that this procedure, so far as the his 
tory of Spartan antiquity was neglected, 
was due to ignorance arid resulted in 
misstatement ! Why should not a part 
of the mischiefs discovered by him, and 
the germ at least of the remainder, 
have always existed in the Spartan state, 
even if it was not perhaps until after the 
Persian wars that this germ developed 
with gradually increasing strength and 

Trieber commends only deserves to be 
praised because in fact even in historical 
matters we are fully entitled to argue 
from consequences to their causes, from 
the end to the beginning. Whoever con 
siders the facts collected in the note on 
II. 9. 37 (350) will hardly find the sug 
gestion of Trieber and others that the 
readiness of the Spartan ephors and sena 
tors to receive bribes only belongs to later 
times particularly credible; but first of 
all he will enquire, with what date these 
later times ought rightly to commence. 
Fulleborn in a note to Garve s translation 
II p. 242 says most sensibly : Aristotle s 
remarks are very strangely contradicted 
by all the famous anecdotes of the hero- 
ism and chastity of the Spartan women. 
But different periods must be distin- 

guished in Spartan history and it 

should be borne in mind that Aristotle 
after all deserves more credit than 
scattered anecdotes of such a kind. But 
should not this consideration be extended 
to other cases ? Where Aristotle assumes 
that Spartan institutions were always 
thus and thus, while later writers con 
tradict him and even claim to know 
the names of those who introduced the 
change, should we directly and unhesita 
tingly pronounce these later authorities 
right? See the notes on n. 9 14 (299, 

300)- 15 (303). 

2 Of what is really the main point 
Aristotle says this himself II. 9 34 (cp. 
note). See further the notes on n. 9 5 

(283), II (295 b), 20 ( 3 l8), 23 (324), 

25 (33). *7 (335). 31 (34i). 


Spartan constitutions (with the addition merely of the Carthaginian) 
to be the next best after his own model state, and thus himself to 
sacrifice to the idol he has just destroyed. As to the socialist 
elements in those constitutions, they certainly do not go too far for 
him, but on the contrary not far enough; like his master, he is far 
more rigidly logical. The social principles of Aristotle s model state 
are as strictly deduced as those of Plato s. 

It would be quite incredible that, amongst the best approved con 
stitutions actually established, Aristotle should not have mentioned 
Solon s as well as the other three. For this reason alone it is hardly 
conceivable that the section in which it is discussed should not be 
genuine: rather is it matter of surprise that the subject is dismissed so 
briefly. But the mere list of legislators, with which the second book 
ends, is certainly a foreign interpolation which contradicts the clearly 
expressed purpose of the book 1 . 


We might naturally expect the exposition of Aristotle s own model 
constitution to follow directly upon this criticism of those which claim 
that title. But here again, with that characteristic unlikeness to Plato 
which was before remarked 2 , our philosopher declines to regard as 
comparatively unimportant everything else in political theory except the 
perfect state. The positive or constructive side of the theory of the 
constitution, to which we now come, includes two parts, one general, 
the other special. The former 3 and much shorter portion, ITL__CC. i 13, 
treats of the fundamental conditions of the healthy working of constitu 
tions, which, as such, apply equally to the best form of state and to all 
others 4 . More explicitly, this portion falls into two main divisions : the 
firstJA} 1 _cc. i 5, while touching here and there by anticipation 5 upon 
the classification of separate constitutions, for the most part merely 
prepares for this by a discussion of the fundamental political con 
ceptions which must be assumed for all of them: the true citizens cc. i, 

1 See further the notes on u. 12 i, solution of the problem of the ut- 
10 (421), 12 (423, 425), 13 (427). most importance for all constitutions and 

2 p. 21. intimately connected with the subject of 

3 On what follows compare Susemihl Bk. I whether and to what extent the 
On the Third Book of Aristotle s Politics family and private property, institutions 
in Philologits xxix. 1870. 97 119. subserving individual interests, have any 

4 Hildenbrand, op. c. 408 f. He rightly right to continue in the presence of the 
points out another reason why Bk. in state, the organization for the common 
should follow closely on Bk. n; the weal. 

latter, at its very outset, along with its 5 ill. i 9 n. (439 b), 3 r, i . 

task of criticism attempts a positive (456), 5 57 . (508). 


2 : the essential identity of a state c. 3 : the relation between the virtue 
of the good citizen and that of the good man cc. 4, 5. Now this 
relation will vary under different constitutions and thus determine their 
nature and comparative merit. The subject of the remaining chapters 
(B), cc. o 13, is, firstly, a definition of constitution (TroXtreta) in general, 
and a preliminary classification of the several forms of the state 
As we are told in Bk. L, the end of the state is Happiness, 

the true well-being and common weal of the citizens. All constitutions 
which make the interest of the governed the end of government are 
normal constitutions (opOal TroAtretcu) : those which exist for the interest 
of the governors are corruptions or degenerate varieties (7mpeK/?ao-eis) 
c. 6. Then, by a merely numerical standard, the normal constitutions 
are provisionally divided into Monarchy, True Aristocracy and Polity 
(Ilo/Weca proper); the corrupt forms into Tyranny (rvpavviY), Oligarchy, 
Democracy; according as one man, a minority, or the majority respectively 
rule (c. 7). We pass on (c. 8) to consider secondly a series of difficult 
problems (arro^ou). From the discussion of the first of these it appears 
that it is merely an accident of Oligarchy and Democracy that a 
minority governs in the one, a majority in the other. It is essentially 
the selfish government of the rich by the poor which constitutes De 
mocracy, the selfish government of the poor by the rich which con 
stitutes Oligarchy (c. 8). The remaining discussions treat at greater 
length three separate inquiries : (a) in c. 9, (ft) in cc. 10, n, (y) in cc. 12, 
13 \ Fromjjie- -definitions just framed the first (a) draws the-inference 
that in reality the true end of the state is not adequately secured upon 
the democratic principle equal political privileges to all citizens..- who 
are equal in respect of free birth: nor yet upon the principle of 
oligarchy; for the state is no joint-stock trading company: the aristo- 
cratical principle of intelligence, virtue, and merit is alone sufficient 

1 The subdivisions of in. cc. i 13 
may thus be tabulated : 

(A) First main division : cc. i ^ 

(a) Who is the true citizen? cc. 1,2 
(/3) What constitutes the identity of 

a state ? c. 3 

(7) Is the virtue of the good citizen 
the same with the virtue of 
the good man? cc. 4, 5. 

(B) Second main division : cc. 6 13 
(I) Constitution defined ; preliminary 

classification of constitutions : 
cc. 6, 7. 

(II) Discussion of difficult problems 
(dwopiai) : cc. 813 

More precise definitions of Demo 
cracy and Oligarchy : c. 8 
The comparative merit of consti 
tutions : cc. 9 13 
(a) the aristocratical principle pre 
ferable to that of democracy 
and of oligarchy: c. 9 
(/3) the mass of the citizens and the 
laws in what sense sovereign 
on an aristocratical principle: 
cc. 10, ii 

(7) the claims of the better citizens 
and of the mass how best ac 
commodated on this principle, 
and the varieties (monarchy, 
pure aristocracy, polity) 
thence resulting : ce. 12, 13. 


(c. 9). This is followed by the inference (/3) that the higher the capacity 
of a body of citizens, and consequently of a state, the more as a rule 
does the worth of eminent individuals fall short of that of the great mass 
of other citizens taken collectively, just as the wealth of the richest 
individuals amongst them is outweighed by the total property belonging 
to the remainder. Hence, even on an aristocratical principle, sovereignty 
belongs to the whole body. Yet this many-headed sovereign, besides 
being restrained by the laws, must always in the direct exercise of its 
powers be confined to the election of magistrates (apxaipeo-iai) and to 
the scrutiny of their conduct, when, at the expiry of their term of office, 
they render an account of their stewardship (cvfowu). All the details 
of state affairs will be entrusted to the magistrates elected by such a 
competent civic body from amongst its ablest members. 

A marvellously profound thought this, marking its author s essential 
independence of Plato 1 , and proving how powerfully he had been 
influenced by democracy and the Athenian polity. However distinctly 
he, like Plato, disapproves of its unrestrained development in Athens 
and elsewhere subsequently to the time of Pericles 2 , he has nevertheless 
laid down for all time the justification of the democratic element in 
political life 3 , and has done something at least to set a proper limitation 
to it. Moreover this thought has a far wider bearing. A true con 
stitutional state combining freedom and order, whether under a mon 
archy or a republic, whether prince or people is sovereign within it, is 
only conceivable if the sovereign has definite limitations imposed by 
law upon the direct exercise of his sovereignty, in keeping with the true 

1 Spengel Ucber Arist. Pol. 15 n. 18, recht\>. 463 ff (Leipzig 1860. 8) has really 

Henkel, op. cit. So, n. 12, Oncken op. c. shown "the fallacy of his analogies" as 

II 165 f., 174. The last rightly remarks Henkel thinks /. c., may be seen from 

that with this proposition Aristotle set the note on III. n. 2 (565!)). Zeller (op. 

himself free from the conceit of philo- cit. n ii 717) on the other hand finds them 

sophic omniscience, while to Plato no- to the point, and Henkel himself con- 

thing was so certain as that the Demos tinues ; However, as Spengel remarks 

meant the sovereignty of folly, and the 
rule of philosophers the reign of wis- 

dom itself. But how can Congreve con 
ceive of Aristotle s own ideal state if he 
thinks (p. 137) that this proposition is only 
relatively true (not the slightest trace of 
this is to be found in its author), and is 
intended only to indicate that of the two 
evils, democracy and oligarchy, the for 
mer is the lesser ? This is strange ex 

2 For this reason Oncken s assertion 
/. c. 172, that the exposition given n 
15, 16 is borrowed from observation of 
the Attic democracy, as it was even after 

Arist. Stud. ii. 56 n. i, "even Aris- 
totle is not disposed to allow the public 
a correct judgment on that which is 
strictly scientific. But of that which 
concerns mankind at large what the 
Greeks denote by Koival Zwoiai every 
one can judge, and the multitude 
often judges more correctly than a spe- 
cialist ; who is often prejudiced with- 
out knowing it." Or as Goethe in 
one passage expresses it, "There is no 
doubt this public, so much honoured and 
despised, is almost always wrong in 
particulars, hardly ever in its broad 
views. " That Aristotle s confidence 

Pericles time, is not correct. goes somewhat too far is shown in the 

3 Whether Trendelenburg in Natur- note on in. 15. 8. 


external and internal relations of power. No doubt the restraints 
imposed by a constitutional state of large size in modern times are 
very different from those devised by Aristotle for his Greek canton- 
state, and suggested by the forms most suited to his purpose amongst 
those in actual existence. Yet after all, although the idea was foreign 
to him and to all antiquity, it is upon just this principle that representa 
tive government rests. Now-a-days the people does not elect the 
magistrates, unless it be the president of a republic, the borrowed 
monarchical head of the whole state: they are nominated by the monarch 
or his republican fac-simile, and there is no popular court to which 
they are directly accountable. Legislation again, the settlement of the 
state revenue and expenditure, and all that is included therein, are no 
longer directly in the hands of the entire body of the citizens. But 
even under a strict constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is the 
only recognized sovereign, the people have a most substantial share of 
political privilege, in that through their representatives they take part 
indirectly in legislation, in voting the budget, the ratification of treaties 
and the control of the administration. Even the most conservative 
modern statesman no longer overlooks the fact that the strange phe 
nomenon, changeable as the wind, called public opinion 1 , may in certain 
circumstances be consolidated into a firm, enduring, real popular will, 
which even under the most absolute monarchy gradually becomes the 
most powerful and irresistible of all political forces; and that thus the 
so-called sovereignty of the people, which as a legal principle is more than 
doubtful, yet in fact indirectly and ultimately ever prevails. No one 
knows better than Aristotle that nothing is more foolish than the masses: 
but he is quite as well aware, that again there is nothing wiser. Where the 
one quality ceases and the other begins he has not attempted to deter 
mine and perhaps this is an attempt which no mortal man can make with 
success. He is far too well-trained a realist, to fall into the error of 
those who treat that Proteus, the public, as if it did not exist, or who 
do not know how to reckon with such a force 2 . He was, so far as we 
know, the first to expound, prove, sift, and limit this thought which up 
till then had only been thrown out by democratic party leaders 3 ; the first 
who, while accepting it not with interested views merely but from full 
conviction, yet considers it impartially in the spirit of the true statesman 
< who has in view only the welfare of all, and of the psychologist who 
has an understanding for the instincts of a great people. He believes 

^ Demosth. Fah.^ leg. 135:: w o fdv 017- 2 Oncken op. c. n. 168. 

/J.QS eanv affraQ^-qroTarov Trpay/ma TUV TTO.V- 3 Compare Athenagoras in Thucyd. VI. 

rwv^Kal acrvvderdTaTOV, wo-rrep ev tfaAdrr?? 39. i : also Pericles ib. II. 40, Otanes in 

7Ti>evfj.a a/caratrraroi , a>s av rvxfj KivovfJievos. Herod. III. 80 s. Jin. 


1 the individual can be ennobled thro ugk- the common feeling of the 

* body-corpCfate Ho which he belongs ; that his powers and intelligence 
can be multiplied, his good instincts raised, his bad ones corrected 
through being merged in a higher unity; and this is the only ethical 

* point of view, under which an intrinsic right to political elevation can 
be ascribed to the people^ Aristotle uses an example here (c. 1 1 3) 
which contains in itself a great concession. The capacity of the 
public for judging in matters of artistic taste he touches upon as a 
truth which needs no proof; and yet on this very field the right of 
the masses to decide is much more disputed and much more dis- 
putable than on that of public life, where the weal and woe of each 
individual is in question and .{he healthy instinct frequently sees 
further than- all the intelligence of the experts 1 . Plato is of quite 
another opinion (Laws in. 700 E ff.) L) , and nothing is easier than by 
resolving the public into its elements to show that it really consists of 
mere cyphers 3 : but it is impossible to do away with the fact that the 

* poet or artist is nothing without this public, which he must conquer in 
order to rule, and that the judgments of this court have a force with 
which the view of the experts, who are seldom agreed, can never be 
matched 4 . Spengel 5 is undoubtedly right : these chapters (in. cc. 9 
13) contain doctrines more important than any to be found elsewhere 
in the work, doctrines which deserve to be written in letters of gold. 

This section ends with the remark (in. n. 20) that all this does not 
as yet inform us what kind of laws there ought to be, but simply that 
those made in the spirit of the right constitution are the right ones. In 
other.words^the orjler of merit of the normal constitutions, and in its 
complete form that of the degenerate varieties C 3 is not yet decided. We 

1 See however the notes on III. n i (i) Aristotle did not recognize Polity as 
(565 b), 15 8 (647). standing on an equality with the other 

2 Yet on the other hand see Sy mp. 194. two forms of government, vi (iv). 8. i ; 

3 Such a resolution Socrates under- and (2) no greater rights are granted to 
takes in Xenoph. Memor. in. 7 i n the the people in a Polity than in an aristo- 
caseofthe popular assembly (Vettori). cracy or a moderate democracy, VI (iv) 

4 Oncken II. 165 f. What, he rightly 14. 10, 14. And when Oncken made 
adds, would have become of the Ger- the assertion (n. 174) that Aristotle in- 
man drama of Lessing, Goethe, and variably subordinated to the law and the 
Schiller, had its fate rested solely with popular decree the wisdom and virtue of 
the critics, from Gottsched and Nicolai even the best individual citizen, he must 
down to the romantic school ? It is surely have forgotten the substance of 
however a mistake to suppose that the ill. c. 13, c. 17 5 8. 

further step from this passive popular 5 Arist. Stud. II. p. 54 (646). 
sovereignty to the active sovereignty, 6 In general the result of the preceding 
which finds expression in the self-govern- statements is that Democracy is prefer 
ment of the Demos by the Demos was able to Oligarchy, and the latter prefera- 
also taken by Aristotle, when he re- ble to a Tyranny ; but whether and how 
cognized Polity as a form of government far a moderate oligarchy deserves to rank 
on an equality with Monarchy and Aris- before an unrestrained democracy has not 
tocracy (Oncken II. 169, 239 f.). For yet been decided. 


naturally expect the remaining discussion (y), cc. 12, 13, to give at 
least the outlines of such a decision, bringing the whole exposition into 
real organic connexion with the previous classification of forms of 
government, and thus concluding the general theory of the constitution. 
But at first sight this expectation would seem to be wholly disappointed. 
Schlosser 1 was the first to find fault, not without reason. So much of 
the previous discussion (cc. 8 n) is repeated in cc. 12, 13 that he 
conjectured, not very happily, that these chapters had been transposed. 
After him Bernays 2 declared cc. 12, 13 to be simply another version 
of cc. 9 ii and cc. 16, 17. This view requires careful examina 
tion. Against it may be urged that the subject of cc. 14, 15 (indeed 
the whole discussion irepi /focriXeux?, cc. 14 17) is quite as closely con 
nected by its contents with c. 11 as it is with the latter half of c. 13 
( Z 3 2 5)j an( l m uch more so than it is with cc. 12, 13 i 12 ; and 
as it most naturally -follows upon c. i3 3 , there would be a tremendous 
gap, in accordance with the remark above made, between the end of 
c. ii and the discussion on Monarchy at the beginning of c. 14, which 
on Bernays view would directly follow. Notwithstanding this, cc. 12, 
13 i 12 might well pass for another version of cc. 9 ii, lacking 
only the important second question as to the limits to the sovereignty 
of a competent body of citizens. In that case, however, the editor 
must have made more than a slight change in the passage to adapt it 
to its present place. For though the reference in 13 i to c. 9 if. as 
preceding might be cut out as a loose addition, that contained in 
13 2 is firmly embedded in the context 4 . On the other hand, the 
latter part of c. 13 ( 13 25), which is really devoid of all con 
nexion with the earlier part as it at present stands 5 , might conveniently 
come immediately after c. ii as an exception to the rule there set 
forth, thus: if however an individual man is superior to all the 
citizens together, then in the best state he stands above the law 
as absolute king and ruler. The question of ii 20 noticed 
above 13 would then remain unanswered, but it might be urged that 
it belongs to the theory of the special constitutions to provide the 
answer. But graver considerations remain. From ii 8 it would 

1 In his translation vol. I. p. 296 ;/. 79. tioned. But surely it is enough that in 
Cp. my note on ill. 13. 12 (599). 13 20 the mention of them as opposed 

2 In the note to his translation, p. 172. to the corrupt forms serves to introduce 

3 Bernays indeed disputes this. He the whole of the succeeding exposition, 
maintains that the sentence which states although at last this stops short ( 24) 
the propriety of this transition, ( yap merely at the antithesis of the best con- 
TWf opduv 7roAiTetc3j> fj.iav dva.i ravTTjv i. e. stitution and the corrupt forms. 
paffiXdav (in. 14. i) finds no point of con- 4 Cf. the notes on III. 13 I, 2. 
nexion in the last words of c. 13, since the 5 As Conring saw. 

normal constitutions are not there men- 6 P. 41 : see also p. 43 n. 2. 

BOOK HI. cc, 12, 13. 43 

follow, ill contradiction to Aristotle s view, that even in the best 
state the magistrates might be elected from men of a definite census 
only 1 . Further there is one short sentence in c. 13, in its tra 
ditional place entirely unconnected with what precedes or follows, 6, 
which however would be quite in place immediately before 13. The 
close of 12 has no counterpart at present in the previous chapters, 
yet it cannot be separated from its immediately preceding context ; and 
it is evident that the subsidiary question here raised, Are the best 
laws to be made for the advantage of the better citizens or of the 
majority? stands in the closest connexion with the main question 
at n 2o 2 ; but no less evident that the answer to it here given is 
incomplete 3 . There is then in any case a lacuna after 13 12: we 
can easily imagine something to fill it, after which what in our present 
order stands as 6 followed quite naturally 4 . 

If therefore we really have two versions of the same subject-matter 
before us, then the older one contained in cc. 12, 13 has been handed 
down to us in worse condition and is the more incomplete ; the later 
version, cc. 9 11, must have been left unfinished. In any case there 
is no redundancy noticeable here, but rather a lamentable deficiency. 
But on the other hand, the inquiry as to which is the most normal and 
best of the normal constitutions (n 20) can only be conducted by 
a more exact determination and modification of the previous result 
with regard to the most legitimate holder of sovereign power ; and this 
consideration seems to render necessary a certain review of all the 
political factors, whatever their justification. It was further stated 
expressly, n i, that all the cases except that in which the sovereignty 
of the people is justified are to be afterwards discussed. Now it 
cannot be denied that c. 12 does make a start in this direction by 
first deciding universally which factors really can lay claim to 
political rule and thereby granting at the outset that wealth (and 
therefore Oligarchy) has a certain justification". The diffuseness 
of the repetition is not commendable , but in such works as those 
of Aristotle s which have been preserved it has simply to be accepted 

1 See the note on in. n. 8 (569). tial dissent in Philologus xxix. 11315 

2 7r6TpovTiI)vo/j,odeT-r)i>o/j.o6T r}Teoi>,(3ov- and in the critical edition. It requires 
\o,uei>ti)Tide(rda.LTous6pdoTaTovsv6[ji.ovs,7rpbs correction in one important point only 
rb rQiv fie\TiQvuv crv/^cpepov 77 -jrpos rb rcGc which does not affect the present ques- 
ir\ei6vwv ; in. 13 12. Compare OTTOIOUS tion : see the note on III. 13. 12 (599). 
/j-evroi rtras Set "elrai roi>s 6p6<2s Kifj.evovs Compare also Susemihl Compos, dcr 
vo/j.ovs, ovSev TTW 5^\oi/...7rA?}i> TOVTO ye Arist. Pol. 23 ff (where however the last 
(j)a.vpbv 6 rt del irpos rrjv iro\<.Teia.v /cet<r0cu sentence of n. 19 should be rescinded) 
roi)j vopovs, ii -20. and in part Spengel Arist. St^ld. III. 24. 

3 See Thurot s excellent and convinc- 4 See again the note on in. 13. 12. 
ing analysis Etudes 47 ff., from which 5 Cp. the note on in. 11. i. 
Susemihl should not have expressed par- 6 See on ill. 13. 12 n. (599). 


in silence. The main point is that in the lacuna following 13 12, 
before 6 (the proper place of which is between 12 and 13), a 
convenient place presented itself for a discussion declaring the true 
Aristocracy to be an unlimited democracy of none but competent men 
and ranking it above Polity (Ho/Weio,) 1 ; as in the latter the inferior 
capacity of the body of citizens leads to the introduction of a property 
qualification to ensure the election of none but men of special excel 
lence as magistrates. Lastly, it is clear from cc. 14 17, that in the 
developed Greek state there is only one case where Aristotle admits 
monarchy, namely, when the monarch is superior in ability to all the 
rest taken together ; and he assumes that only the citizens of the best 
state, all men of ability themselves, will accept such a monarchy. It 
becomes doubly difficult then, nay almost impossible, that such a case 
should ever occur. Still it remains just conceivable, and as long as this 
condition of things lasts the best state, instead of being an aristocracy, 
is, in this exceptional case, the only true monarchy : this then is the 
absolutely best constitution, superior even to Aristocracy 2 . 


If the foregoing arguments are sound, the special theory of the 
constitution falls into three parts ; the theory (i) of monarchy, (ii) of the 
best constitution, (iii) of the remaining constitutions. The first com- 

v prises Bk. in cc. 14 17, the second Bkk. iv and v. (in the old order 
vn, vin), the third the remaining three books. 

Aristotfe s conception of monarchy as explained above not un 
naturally determines the very character of his discussion of it. This 
discussion has indeed come down to us in the utmost confusion, and 
appears somewhat defective : but even after a clear order of thought 
has been attained by means of various transpositions, the impression it 
makes upon us is, from the standing of our own political development 
and experience, highly unsatisfactory. The ciu*&e-e-4kis_. is not far_tp 
seek. _The only_true and proper monarchy which Aristotle from his 
point of_view can recognise, is absolute^moTTgrchy ; we may for the 
most part entirely concur in his objections to this form, and yet con 
sider that, treated thus far, the subject has been by no means exhausted. 

^ In Aristotle s time the sole monarchies of any note which history had 

1 See the note last quoted. ability to all the others together, in- 

2 See vi (iv). 2. 2 with nn. (1136, eluding even the best, must certainly be 
1137). If this premiss be granted, the absolutely the best. 

unlimited rule of a person superior in 


produced, except the Greek tyrannies, were despotism, as found in the 
huge empires of the east, and the so-called patriarchal kingship of 
the heroic age the rule of a chief over a small clan and territory, 
over a Phoenician or Hellenic city-state or canton in prehistoric cen 
turies. Even the rule of the Macedonian kings was, by him at least, 
regarded in no other light. For the small Greek state, which he 
keeps solely in view, monarchy is hardly deserving of much more 
consideration than as the imperfect historical starting-point of all subse 
quent development 1 . In the organism of the large modern state, abso 
lute monarchy, where it lias rightly understood its task, has actually 
Helped to educate men for_a_reign of law under a constitutional 
monarchy. ~Nowhere~^Tse^could this_jatter anseT Trle~ancient state 
had not got so far as its very first condition, which is representation ; 
and like all other political thinkers of antiquity even Aristotle, as 
was remarked above (p. 40), was as yet far removed from the faintest 
idea of this kind 2 . It was his too one-sided conception of the state as 
the exclusive means of educating men to mental and moral excellence 
that gave rise to his ideal state, and made him set ideal monarchy in 
it above ideal aristocracy, thereby declaring the form of government 
proper for intellectual minors to be the highest form for the most 
enlightened, although, this being so, he can scarcely hide from 
himself its impossibility 3 . This however did not hinder him from 
seeking, by the adjustment of opposite forces, a further practical 
ideal amongst the degenerate constitutions in Polity (IloXtTeta) and 
so-called aristocracy. Here he has rightly pursued the thought of 
elevating the authority of the state above the strife of divergent in 
terests ; yet from the circumstances, the most effective realization of 
this thought in limited monarchy never came under his ken. He can 
finely describe the functions of the king^Jjut thejreal significance of 
this form of government is concealed from him : he gets no farther 

1 Spengel Arist. Stud. n. 57: " Bacrt- cussions of cc. 14 16? The way kings 
Xet a is to Aristotle a historical tradition govern, their inner life, their influence 
rather than a form with any further ca- on the people is quite lost sight of. This 
pacity for life in the mental development must be answered in the affirmative with 
of his own nation ; and like all Greek one exception, to be afterwards men- 
philosophers and political writers he tioned p. 46, for which we can easily 
rarely notices any other. Thus he is account. The ideal king, the preeminent- 
careful to set forth in various diropiat. the ly best man, can have no instructions given 
difficulties involved in the practicability him (c. 13 14, c. 17 2). 
and proper limits of this government." 2 And therefore far from any idea that 
Our astonishment at this defective me- true popular liberty thrives best under 
thod of treatment, which first surprised wisely limited monarchy. 
Schlosser, hereupon ceases. Spengel 3 See the notes on ill. 13 14 (601), 
put the question Ueb. Arist. Pol. 16 25 (615). 

Did Aristotle conceive the theory of 4 See Henkel op. c. 95. n. 25; also 

monarchy to be complete with the dis- vm (v). 10 9, 10 with n. (1665). 


.than to base it exclusively upon personal merits 1 , so that no place is 
eft for it in the practical ideal of mixed constitutions 2 . This inevitably 
causes an internal inconsistency in the work. According to his plan, 
the last three books ought to have treated exclusively of the remaining 
constitutions other than monarchy and pure aristocracy. But on the 
historical ground of revolutions and their prevention he cannot help 

^ treating of monarchy over again in Bk. vin (v). 

It is abundantly clear from the foregoing that nothing can be a 
greater mistake than the assertion, sometimes made of late, that in 
his ideal king Aristotle had his own pupil, Alexander, before his mind 3 . 
It may be surprising that the philosopher s relations with the court of 
Macedon failed so completely to influence his political theory, that he 
had no apprehension that he was living right at the close of Hellenic his 
tory, with its political development, its system of great and small states; 
but on the contrary saw nothing impossible in such a new develop 
ment of a Greek city-state as his ideal constitution would present. But 
the fact that it is so cannot be altered by our astonishment and in 
ability, with the means at our disposal, satisfactorily to explain it. This 
idealjrf Aristotle s is in reality a small Hellenic city and not a large 
s^fate like Macedon, which ceases to be a state (TTO AIS) in his sense 

^"ontre term, and is no more than a race or nationality (eflvos). carrying 
out a policy of conquest and not, as he requires, a policy of peace. 
If then the ideal king is to arise only in the ideal state, he cannot be 
an Alexander. Once no doubt the thought flashes forth, iv (vn). 7. 3, 
that the Greeks united in one could conquer the whole world 4 . But 

J;p Aristotle the end of the state is, as we said, not the conquest of 
the world but something quite different; no longing for such a state 

1 See the ff. on III. 13. 9; also vi (iv). last attempts to stamp Aristotle as a 
2. 2, vin (v). i ii with n. (1503), 10 Macedonian partizan, made by Bernays 
36, 37 n - (1708)- Phokion, pp. 4042 (Berlin 1881), and 
Henkel op. c. 86. Wilamowitz Antigonos von Karystos 1 82 f., 
So Hegel Gesch. d. Phil. n. 401, 185 f. (Berlin 1881), have not proved more 
Hildenbrand op. c. 426. Recently On- fortunate ; see JBursiarfs Jahresber. xxx. 
cken (op.c. I. i6f., i88f., n. 261 ff.) 1882. 11,15 ff. Compare also Hug De- 
fancied he had discovered traces of Mace- mosthenes as a political thinker (Studien 
donian sympathies completely pervading aus dem dassischen Alterthttm I. 51 103, 
the Politics. How unsuccessful this at- Freiburg 1881), who goes still further 
tempt was may be judged upon referring than I do. Wilamowitz in a review of 
to Torstrik Litt. Centralbl. 1870 coll. 1177 Hug (Deutsche Litteraturzeitnng 1882, 
1179; Henkel <?/.<:. 89 . (19), 9 7. ( 2 6); col. 1081 f.) has already somewhat modi- 
Bradley op. c. 1 79, 238 f. ; Susemihl in the fied his position : see Jahresber. I.e. 18 f., 
Jahrb. /. Philol. cm. 1871. 133139 where I have also explained why the 
(where too much is conceded to Oncken) passage IV (vn). 2. n (cp. the note} is 
and Bursian s philol. Jahresber. m. (1874 still important for this question although 
-5)- 370 n.; or to the notes on in. 13 the whole chapter, to which it belongs, 
13 (601), 25 (615); 14 15 (633); 17 is spurious. 
5 (678) : vi (iv). ii 19 (1303). The 4 Cp. the note there (782). 


of united Hellas, which would contradict all the rest of the Politics, is 
in the least discoverable in this passage. 

On the subject of historical science Aristotle s notions are very 
defective : he is in truth still far removed from that which we our- 
1 selves have only learned to know within the last century, that which 
Turgot and Lessing intended by the improvement and education 
of humanity, and Hegel defined as its organic development. He 
altogether mistook the true importance of labour, the mightiest lever 
in this process. Yet it would be going too far to deny him all 
insight into the course of development of the Greek nation from the 
state of nature to the state of civilization, and from one grade of civili 
zation to another, or into the features of this progress stamped upon 
the history of the Greek constitutions 1 . We are set right on this point 
by a brief but especially interesting part of the discussion on monarchy 
(in. 15 10 13), when taken in connexion with similar passages further 
on 2 . Aristotle has not simply observed for himself the career of the 
separate states; he knows that they have also a common constitutional 
history : that a definite order of polity belongs to an entire period : 
that the same development of mental culture, of social and military 
organisation, is accomplished all through a group of connected states 
and causes their political relations to assume an homogeneous form. 
And so he depicts with a few masterly strokes the chief stages of 
development through which the political world of Hellas passed 3 . 
The first development embraces the normal constitutions as far as 
Polity : the second, in another order, the degenerate forms as far as 
democracy : the former carrying us to restrained, and the latter to 
unrestrained, popular supremacy. The main character of both periods 
is republican. In the first of them Monarchy is only a starting-point, 
as has been said, for Aristocracy and Polity; in the second Tyranny 
|s_only a stage in the transition to Democracy 1 . 

Any one who has followed the order of our work up to this point 
will be bound to admit that the description of the ideal Aristocracy, or 
the normal and absolutely best constitution, can now no longer be 
deferred. If so, then the two books containing it, which have come 
down to us as the seventh and eighth, should according to Aristotle s 
design follow directly as the fourth and fifth. Now the last chapter 
of Book in, c. 1 8, forms an immediate transition to this description, 
breaking off with an unfinished sentence, which is repeated in another 

1 Oncken II. 169, cp. 137 f. description leaves much to be desired, as 

2 Cp. the notes on in. 14 12 (627), may be gathered from Oncken s remarks. 
15 ii, 12 (662), 13 (663). Cp. also the notes on in. 15 1113. 

3 Henkel op. c. 94. But certainly this 4 Henkel op. c. 96 f. 


form at the beginning of the seventh book of the old order 1 , but with 
an apodosis here added and the sense complete as follows : Hejvhp 
( would investigate wherein the best constitution consists must first 
^^Helcrmine what is the best life] since on Aristotle s view of the end of 
the state the one serves as an aid to the other 2 . And this circumstance 
loses none of its weight by the fact that this transition can hardly be by 
Aristotle himself, but by the author of the older edition. For even 
then it shows (see above, p. 17) that he at all events found the seventh 
and eighth books still arranged correctly as the fourth and fifth. 

It can hardly be maintained that the discussion contained in the 
first chapter of the seventh or, more correctly, the fourth book, as to 
where that best and most desirable life, the life of happiness, is to be 
sought, is not by Aristotle : but while appropriate to his oral lectures, as 
was remarked above (p. 12), it is to all appearance very foreign to this 
written work 3 . And this is no less true of the treatment of a second 
preliminary question which follows in close connexion, in cc. 2 and 3 and 
the beginning of c. 4 ; namely, whether capacity in war or in peace is 
more desirable for the state, and in particular whether the active life of 
the practical statesman or the contemplative life of the scientific inquirer 
is the happier for the individual. Further, the way in which this subject is 
settled or rather left unsettled is quite unlike Aristotle 4 . To the 
genuine Aristotle this is no preliminary question, but the really funda 
mental problem of his whole ideal of the state. The one side of 
it he has himself settled with the most desirable clearness when de 
scribing his ideal, iv (vn). 14. 10 if., in such a way that he at the same 
time lays down the principles for the solution of the second and much 
more difficult question, which is really the cardinal problem of his whole 
practical philosophy. For here no less than in what follows 5 , as in the 
Ethics and Metaphysics* , he ranks the theoretical life above the life of 
practical politics, and yet he considers the individual to be merely one 
living member of that corporate body the state : and the reconciliation 
ofjhis_antithesis can only be found in a political lileTwhich itself regards 
the promotion of art and science as its highest and ultimate aim 7 . Thjs. 

1 In the text both versions will be 8 (743), 9 (745), 10 : 4 r. 

found at the commencement of Book iv 5 IV (vn). 15 8 10, V (viu). c. 3, 

(vn). c. 5 4 with nn. (1023, 1024) 12 14. 

2 Cp. in particular Spengel Ueb. Arist. Cp. the notes on IV (vn). 14 8 (903), 
Pol. 17 If., Arist. Stud. u. 60 (652) ff., 15 2 (921) : V (vin). 2 i (977) : also on 
and Susemihl in the Jahrb. f. PhUol. c. 3 5 (991, 992), 5 10 (1032), and 
xcix. 1869. 604 ff. Excursus I upon Bk. v (vili). 

3 See the notes on IV (vn). i 2, 10 6 See the passages quoted by Zeller n 
(704). i3 J 4- ii 614 n. i. 

4 See the notes on iv (vn). 2 36, i Cp. Exc. I at the end of Bk. v (vin). 
ii (7^5), 16 (729); 3 3, 6(741), 


is really the fundamental thought of Aristotle s ideal state, but we 
nowhere find it worked out; nor could the editor to whom we must 
"attribute tTTe"sedion in question, cc. 2, 3. He would not else have 
attempted in his clumsy manner, unlike Aristotle s 1 , to solve the prob 
lem and fill up the lacuna which he had rightly perceived to exist. 
This circumstance shows then, either that Aristotle stopped short 
on the very threshold of his description of the ideal state, or else 
that his continuation of it, which has not come down to us, had dis 
appeared remarkably early. 

With the fourth chapter the outline of this best constitution really^ 
begins. Aristotle sets out with the external conditions, treating first 
of the natural conditions, of the land and the people (cc. 4 7); then 
of the social and socio-political conditions, the exclusion of the citizens 
from all work for a livelihood, the proper division of the soil, the proper 
qualifications and position of the cultivators, the regulations for the builo- 
ing of the city, its small towns and villages (cc. 9 -12). Here at lengjtn 
begins the internal development of the best constitution : yet by the. 
end of Bk. v (vm). it has advanced no further than its first stage, the" 
education of the boys, in the middle of which it comes to a dead stop, 
so that the third of the three questions proposed in the last chapter 
namely whether melody or rhythm is of greater importance for the 
purposes of musical instruction is never discussed at all, and the ques 
tion what sorts of time are to be employed for the same purposes 
remains undecided 2 . We may at all events be thankful to fate for 
sparing us a section of the work, which is rich in interest for the science 
of education in all ages, though it fails to satisfy our curiosity as to the 
further organisation of the ideal state. Some compensation for the 
deficiency in this direction is afforded by many observations not merely, 
as has been said before, in Bk. n, but also in Bk. in. Thus in the latter 
we learn how this or that ought to be regulated in the state, or some 
times even how it should be in the best state or the best constitution, 
or in the Aristocracy 3 . And Aristotle s many previous intimations 4 , 

1 See the notes on IV (vn). i 10 does not exist or is at any rate unimpor- 
(705) ; 2 6 (717) ; 3 3 (736), 8io. tant. So too Zeller op. c. n ii 676 f., 

2 Cp. the note on v (vm). 7. i (1081). 736 ff. Compare further Spengel Ueb. 
Even William of Moerbeke writes at the die Pol. dcs Arist. 8 foil. 

end of his translation : residuum huius 3 See in. i 9, 10 nn. (440, 441) ; 

operis in greco nondum inveni. Of older 4 4, 5 n. (4/1); n- (49 1 ) on 4 16; 

scholars Conring in particular endeavoured 5 2, 3 n. (504), 5 n. (509); 7 3 

to determine more accurately the parts nn. (536, 537); n S> 9 n - (569) ; 

missing; of the moderns more especially 13 8, 9 n. (595), n, 12 n. (599), 

Hildenbrand (op. c. 449 foil.), who at the 24, 25; 15 46, 9, 10; 16 2 12; 

same time refutes, most successfully in the 17 i, 2 ; c. 18 with the notes, 

main, the arguments by which others have 4 I. 13. 15 with n. (126) cp. n. 9 

in vain sought to show that the deficiency 5, 6 . (285) n. 9 i, 10 9 n. (368), 

H, 4 


1 taken along with other considerations, give us at least partly to under- 
| stand what portions are wanting. 

/^ When we consider the very high mission of culture with which 
fl Aristotle s ideal state is entrusted in the promotion of the sciences, and 
\ the preference which Aristotle expressly concedes to the education of 
^he intellect over that of the character 1 , it is surprising that he takes up 
the whole of early education until the twenty-first year with gymnastic 
and military exercises, so as to leave no more than three years, from the 
fourteenth to the seventeenth, for all the other subjects of instruction 2 . 
Moreover one of them, music, is so limited that an influence upon 
the formation of character, or very little else, is all that is left to it 3 . 
Besides this, only reading, writing, numeration, and drawing are noticed ; 
and this short course of three years will be wholly taken up with them. 
Hence we cannot look for more advanced scientific instruction, and 
even poetry can scarcely be employed for anything further than learning 
to read and write, or getting by heart lyric pieces to sing 4 . The exclu 
sion of comedy, moreover, and of all connected kinds of poetry, from 
the domain of youth is expressly mentioned iv (vn). 17. n; and 
the same holds of all music with a cathartic effect, v (vm). 7. 3 if. 5 . 
On this analogy it can scarcely be doubted that the exclusion must be 
assumed to apply in general to all the kinds of poetry to which solely 
this sort of effect is ascribed by Aristotle, that is, to epos and tragedy 6 
as well as to comedy : and that Aristotle wished to restrict attendance 
at the theatre and the recitals of the rhapsodes to grown-up persons, 
or at any rate not to allow them to young men until after their 
seventeenth year. Thus the use made of poetry for the education 
of the young in Aristotle s ideal state could hardly go beyond a mere 
chrestomathy from Homer, Hesiod, perhaps also from a few tragedies 
and easy prose writers, in learning to read and write. But Aristotle 
states, iv (vn). 15. 9, v (vm). 3. 13, that the education of the body 
must form the commencement, while the moral education must advance 
within the soul, from "which we indirectly learn that a chapter on 

iv (vn). 5 2; 10 10, 14; 16 12; 6 i ff. nn. (1061-2-7-8, 1071-3); 7 sff. 

17 12 cp. 17 5 7 : v (vm). 3 10 nn. (1086-7, 1098, 1104-5-9): also the 

cp- 7 35 6 15, 1 6. Cp. also the note Excursuses I, n, in, iv at the end of Bk. 

on v (vm). 2 2 (979). On n. 6 14, v (vm). 

in. 3 6 foil, see below. 4 Zeller op. c. n ii 737 should be cor- 

1 See iv (vn). 14 8 foil. n. (003), rected by this. 

15 8 and generally the passages quoted 5 Cp. v (vm). 6 9 with n. (1073); 
on p. 48 n. 5. also nn. on 7 4 and Excursus V at the 

2 See v (vm). 4 79 with Exc. I end of Bk. v (vm). 

at the end of Bk. v (vni). 6 See the Introduction to my edition 

3 See v (vm). 5 47 with nn. of the Poetics pp. 8f., 15, 64 f. 
(1024-5-7); 15 foil. nn. (1044, 1045); 


scientific education was intended to follow 1 . And the question, how 
far the higher sciences are to be considered for educational purposes, 
is assuredly not proposed, v (vm). 2. 2, in order to remain unanswered. 
Lastly, in v (vm). 3. 10, a later investigation is expressly announced to 
decide whether one or more subjects should belong to the more refined 
training which aims at the highest intellectual satisfaction : but in the 
account which has come down to us we seek in vain for the fulfilment 
of this promise. On the other hand every direct influence in this 
direction is expressly excluded from the boys education up to their 
twenty-first year, v (vm). 5. 4. Hence we may infer from his own 
words that Aristotle, like Plato", intended a later training in the higher 
sciences for state purposes to follow this lower educational course"; and 
this would furnish the solution of the riddle 4 . Even as to the subjects 
of this higher instruction Aristotle can hardly have thought differently 
from Plato, except that perhaps he added poetry; Pure Mathematics, 
however, Astronomy, the Theory of Music, and lastly, for natures most 
scientifically endowed, Philosophy proper, were certainly the means 
of instruction enjoined. There is ample time for them, as the 
active duties of full citizens do not begin until military service is over, 
iv (vn). 95f,i45; and no one will be eligible for a civil 
magistracy much before his fiftieth year, even if he enters the popular 
assembly earlier, 9 9 ;/. Thus their service in the army leaves the 
younger man leisure for scientific studies. Only Aristotle must have 
maintained, in opposition to Plato, that this extended course should 
be different for practical minds and for those whose bent is more to 
wards theory ; in order to make of the former officials for the state, and 
of the latter its men of science, who in other respects may, and indeed 
ought to rest satisfied with the fulfilment of their general civic duties". 
In this particular Aristotle approached the modern idea of the state more 
nearly than any other ancient thinker. Yet when looked at in the light 
of his own premisses this solution of the problem cannot be said to 
be altogether happy. If in the best state the best man is to be at the 
same time the best citizen and statesman ; if moreover scientific activity 

1 Zeller op.c. II ii 737 n. 4. 218 f. He does not see that it is only in 

2 See tin. on II. 5. 25 (181), IV (vii). the instruction in practical music and in 
17. 15 (970). gymnastic that Aristotle maintains a 

3 No previous enquirer has thought of mean which must not be exceeded ; he 
this. Oncken alone felt the difficulty, never says a word to the effect that in 
but did not also see that with the means the sciences also one can learn too much : 
at our disposal the veil may be sensibly see Exc. I at the end of Bk. v (vm). 
lifted. See next note. 5 See the note on iv (vn). 3. 8 (743). 

4 This disposes for the most part of 6 See in. c. 4 with the notes on r 
Oncken s objections op. c. n 204 ff., (468), 5 (471), 16 (491); c. 5 ; 18 i : 



is to be the higher, moral and practical excellence the lower, part of 
human virtue \ then the only logical consequence is Plato s government 
by philosophers which, taken in itself, Aristotle rightly rejects, n. 

5- 25 1 - 

The chapters on the education of the boys are incomplete: this 
theory of the subsequent higher training of our future citizens, as well 
as the discussion on female education which was expressly promised 
i. 13. 15 (cp. ii. 9 5, 6) 2 , is wanting. We lack too the entire regu 
lations for the external life of children and adults whether men or 
women, or in other words the whole of civic discipline ; for Aris 
totle no less than Plato conceived the state to be an educational 
institution. As a necessary consequence, he took this discipline and 
moral guidance through the whole of life to be simply a continued 
course of education 3 , and both alike to be the proper field of state- 
activity. Almost all the other intimations of Aristotle, to which we find 
nothing corresponding in the execution, relate to this comprehensive 
subject. One special division which he mentions iv (vn). 16 12, 13, 
17 12 (comp. 17 5, 7, 10), is the superintendence of the morals of 
the boys and their education under Inspectors (TraiSoi/o/xoi), officers 
appointed on the Spartan precedent 4 . They are to have their official 
quarters near the gymnasium for the young, iv (vn). 12. 5 : to take 
care that no stones unseemly to their age are told to children even 
under five years of age, c. 17 5; and that they have as little as 
possible to do with the slaves, 7. They have also to take precau 
tions that no improper statues or pictures are exposed to view within 
sight of the children ( 10), from whom even the paintings of a Pauson 
with their comical and satirical exhibitions of what is low and hateful 
must be kept at a distance : v (vm). 5. 2i 5 . In this part of the work 
too we were to have been more precisely informed what habit of body 
in the parents is best adapted to give them healthy offspring 6 ; whether 
comedies should be exhibited, and the recital of satirical poems (e.g. 
allowed, and in what manner ; perhaps also how far drinking 

iv (vn). 7 13, 9 3 n . (808): 13 the remarks in iv (vn). 12 46; 17 

9, 10; 14 7, 8; v (vm). i i, 2 8, 9, as Zeller op. c. n ii 739 . 4 

n. (9/4) : vi (iv) 7 2. rightly reminds us. Cp. nn. on iv (vn). 

1 See the note on n. 5. 25 (182): NIC. 12 5 (863), 17 9 (962). 

Eth. vi. 7. 7 (vi. 8 n 4 4b nft.} Metaph. 4 See Schomaotis Antiquities of Greece 

i. i. 1 1 ff. (981 a 12 ff.j. I. p. 248, Eng. trans, by Mann and Hardy 

2 See the notes on both passages (London, 1880. 8). 

(126-7), (285). 5 See the notes on iv (vn). 12 5, 16 

3 NIC. Eth. x. 9. 9, 1180 a i ff. This 12, 17 5, 10, 12; v (vm). 5 21. 
is not expressly stated in the Politics; 6 See on iv (vn). 16. 12. 

but the same thought forms the basis of 


parties of adults are to be countenanced, iv (vn). 17. 12 . Inspectors 
for the women (ywcuKovo /xoi) are also mentioned along with the inspec 
tors of boys as officials in aristocracies, vi (iv). 15. 13, viz (vi). 8. 23: 
they certainly ought not to be absent from the true Aristocracy 2 . We 
can hardly be wrong in assuming that on the decision of these two 
boards of officers the exposure or rearing of new-born infants de 
pended 3 ; and that for the purpose of maintaining the same fixed 
number of citizens they were authorized, nay were bound, to enforce 
abortion if necessary : n. 6. 10 ff., iv (vn). 16. 15, iy 4 . 

This unalterable number of citizens is bound up with the equally 
unalterable number of inalienable and indivisible family properties, 
iv (vn). 10. n, of which, as in Plato s Laws 5 , each citizen holds two, 
one near the town, and one further off in the country towards the 
boundaries of the territory. This indicates a second treatment of the 
same subject, comprising the more accurate discussion of property in 
general and of national wealth which was expressly promised, iv (vn). 
5. 2; and here the propriety of the provisional definition of national 
wealth adopted in the passage just cited should have been submitted 
to a second and more detailed examination". Here also a place would 
no doubt be found for explaining more fully the reasons promised iv (vn). 
10 10, 14, why Aristotle was induced to adopt o-vo-o-ma ; why it is 
better to promise and grant freedom to serfs and slaves as a reward for 
good conduct; together with the discussion of their general treat 
ment announced in this passage 7 ; also the consideration of the question 
postponed in n. 10. 9, as to what means it may be expedient to tolerate 
in order to prevent an increase of population beyond the limits fixed". 

But there is an explicit proof, that even the political organization 
of the ideal state was to be treated in detail. In one passage, n. 
8. 25, the more precise solution of the question whether and under 
what conditions and at whose instance changes in the established 
laws are admissible is left over for further consideration 9 . What sort 
of restrictions Aristotle wished to introduce in this respect we cannot 
tell : it is only certain that, while he did not allow the popular assembly 
the initiative, he yet made every new law dependent upon their consent 10 . 

1 Zeller, op.c.ii ii 739 n. 3, assumes a 5 Cp. the notes on n. 6. 15, iv (vu). 
discussion on this last point to be pro- 10. n. 

mised. The context does not appear to 6 Cp. the note on iv (vn). 5. 2. 

me to warrant this : see the note there. 7 Cp. the notes there. 

2 See the notes there. 8 Cp. n. on n. 10. 9 (368). 

3 The usage was somewhat different, 9 Cp. the note there, (278). 

though still analogous, at Sparta : see n. 10 Of course constitutional changes are 

on IV (vn). 16. 15. not permissible if it is seriously meant 

4 Seethe notes there; also II. 7. 5 with that this constitution is in all points abso- 
n. (236). lutely the best. 


Moreover, the powers of the popular assembly were but limited even 
in this best of all communities, composed of men not under thirty- 
five 1 nor yet over seventy years of age. Apart from the election of 
magistrates they were not to extend much beyond the acceptance or 
rejection, without further debate or amendment, of treaties, a-nd of 
peace or war, as previously determined upon and proposed by the senate 
and the highest magistrates 2 . Yet on the other hand popular courts of 
justice on the Athenian model were to decide charges brought against 
magistrates during the time of their accountability 3 . Equal in birth, 
in landed estate, in immunity from all remunerative or productive 
labour 4 , and in respect of a public education from their seventh year 5 , 
all citizens of this state enjoy equal rights. Any qualified citizen may, 
it seems, vote for any other for any magistracy, such a civic body being 
credited with the intelligence and good will to nominate to each branch 
of the government the persons most suitable on the ground of the 
distinctions in capacity and training which, in spite of equal circum 
stances, have manifested themselves . But Aristotle certainly did not 
intend to leave undecided at what precise age the entrance upon 
full citizenship was to take place ; nor again at what age men were 
superannuated, and upon retiring became priests, iv (vn). 9. 9, whereby 
almost entire leisure for science was secured to them in their old age 7 . 
The figures 50 and 70 which have been tentatively assumed will at least 
be not far removed from his view ; and thus this governing civic body 
will be considerably in the minority when compared with the total num 
ber of citizens superannuated or not yet fully qualified, the boys, younger 
men, and the aged of the citizen order 8 . Only foreigners and resident 
aliens are allowed to engage in trade, industry, or manual labour : a pro- 

1 See nn. on iv (vn). 9 9, 16 9. :> iv (vn). 17 7, and the note on 4; 

- This follows from n. n. 6, in. u. 15 n. (970): v (vin). 3 13 n. (1003); 

8 ;/., taken in connexion with the other 4 7 ff . and Exc. I at the end of Bk. 

passages quoted in Exc. IV at the end of v (viu). 
Bk. II. (i See I. 7 i n. (58 b) : in. i 9, 10 ;/. 

:: This may be inferred from n. 12. 5, (440,441), n sff., i39. (595), i62 

in. n. 8 : see notes there : also Exc. v at n. (672), 13; 17 i, 2 : iv (vil). 8 4; 

the end of Bk. n. But Aristotle might 9 7, 8 ; 13 9 u. (885), 14 5 : VI (iv). 

have required that the jurors in these n 8: also n. 2 6, 7, and cp. the 

courts should be elected instead of being notes on 11. 2. 4 (133) and in. 13. 12. 

chosen by lot ; see II. 1 1. 7 n. (391). Other passages seem to contradict this, as 

4 n. 9 2ff., ii 10 : 111.5 ^ n.22ff. 4 n. (133): ill. 4 5 n. (471); 

11. (504), 3, 5 . (509)5 iv (vu). 9 i, 5 10; 6 i, 2; 7 i, 2; 15 8 10; 

sf., 9; 10 13; 12 4: v (vin). 2 18 i: but see the notes: also n. on 

3 6 (982); 4 i . (1004) ; 5 8 iv (vn). 9. 9. 

;/. (1028); 6 4 ff. ; 16; 7 i with 7 Because old men are no longer of 

notes. Cp. also Exc. I at the end of service for government n. 9. 25. See the 

Bk. v (vin); n. on i. u. 6 (103) with the note there and on iv (vn). 9. 9 (816). 
passages there quoted. 8 Cp. n. on iv (vn). 9. 9 (817). 


hibition which strikes a severe blow at the cultivation of the imitative 
arts, that is, at the fine arts 1 . The soil is to be cultivated by serfs who 
are not free, or at all events by vassals of non-Hellenic descent who are 
but half free 2 . 

But, while emphatically not a conquering military power any more 
than a trading community, this state with its one aim of culture :i 
makes the largest concessions possible in both these directions. It is 
to be a maritime state, iv (vn). 6. i ff. 4 , as well as, like Athens, Sparta, 
and Thebes, to exercise an hegemony ; that is, to stand at the head of 
a more or less dependent confederation, in which union has been 
achieved, if necessary, with the edge of the sword 5 . In this way 
Aristotle thinks that the peculiar spirit and core of Athenian social and 
political life, that wonderfully noble union of manliness with culture, 
has been best preserved and promoted by a partial fusion with Spartan 
forms. He may even have counted on the tribute of the allies to fill 
the treasury. Otherwise it is not easy to see why, after the wise regu 
lation that only a part of the soil should be broken up into family 
properties, the rest being reserved as domain land, only the expenditure 
upon public worship and the common messes, not that upon any other 
state function, is taken into account when he comes to deal with the 
revenue from this domain land, iv (vn). 9. 7. The messes (o-uo-crma) 
are with Aristotle, as they were at Sparta , at once common meals 
and military unions. Some of them are to be held in the guard- 
houses inside the city wall 7 . All boards of officials have their messes, 
each in its own official quarters : so, too, the priests ; even the 
rangers and field-patrols in the country 8 . The rule of a common mess- 
* table is binding on all collective members of the political body corpo- 
rateV In particular from them springs that voluntary communism 
which Aristotle praises in the Spartans 10 , and the entry into them was 
undoubtedly to begin with enlistment amongst the recruits at the age 
of seventeen 11 . Later on, but yet hardly before the training of these 
recruits is completed 12 with their twenty-first year 13 , they are also per- 

1 Even vocal and instrumental virtuosi Eng. tran., Trieber op. c. i 26. 
in music are classed with manual la- 7 iv (vn). 12. i. 
bourers(/3ctWi;<roi),v(viii).58, ;z. (1028)6, 8 iv (vn). 12 2, 7, 8. 

4ff., 15, 16; 7 6 : comp. Exc. I at 9 Oncken op. c. n. 198. 

the end of Bk. v (vin). 10 n. 5. 5<T., iv (vn). 10. 9, cp. n. 5 

2 iv (vn). 9 8, 10 13. 15, 16, with notes, also the notes on 

3 [ Culture-state ; one which exists II. 5 6 (156 b), 7 n. (158): also 
to promote the higher civilization: seep. vn (vi). 5. 10 with note. 

48. TR.] n v (vm). 4. 9, cp. Exc. i at the end 

4 Cp. notes on iv (vn). c. 6. of Bk. v (vin). 

5 See iv (vn). 14. 21 with ;/. (917). 12 See on iv (vn). 17. n . (966). 

6 Cp. Schomann op. c. pp. 272, 279 13 iv (vn). 17. 15. 


mitted to attend drinking-parties 1 and there to sing, which under all 
other circumstances is strictly prohibited to adults 2 ; further to visit the 
theatre and musical and poetical entertainments of all kinds 3 . 

From the foregoing it is also clear now that the passages to which 
we are referred in n. 6 12, 13, are still extant 4 , but that more 
precise explanations ought to follow. Similarly the promise of future 
discussions upon the size of the town and the question whether it is 
essential that the citizens should be of the same descent, in. 3 6, is 
fulfilled as far as the first part is concerned in iv (vn). c. 4; but the 
second part was scarcely to be dismissed with merely the subsequent 
remark vm (v). 3 n f. ; it was no doubt to be more thoroughly 
discussed in the examination of the absolutely best constitution 5 . 

It appears to us, it was remarked before (p. 46), not so easy to 
understand how the resident alien of Stageira, the great realist, the friend 
of the Macedonian kings under whose spear the last energies of Greek 
life were bleeding away, was still Greek and Athenian enough to dream 
of the possibility that the nobility of mankind, the Greek nation, had 
yet to wait for the future to produce its noblest race, who alone would 
be one day capable of creating this pattern state, iv (vn). c. 7. More 
intelligible, but all the more repulsive, is it to note how Aristotle sets 
about the propagation of this noblest of civic bodies, in true Spartan 
or Platonic fashion 6 , by tyrannical marriage-laws and matrimonial 
supervision and inhuman exposure of children, as if he were raising 
a breed of race-horses : to see the successful defender of the family 
and of property, who investigates with admirable profundity the moral 
nature of marriage , at the same time hampering and almost stifling 
the free use of property and of the mental faculties, and destroying 
the healthy vital atmosphere of marriage. And this by measures which, 
as we have said (p. 34), go far beyond those of Plato in the Laws, 
by fixing a normal number of children which the whole body of citizens 
are permitted to have and sanctioning abortion in order to secure that 
the number is never exceeded. 


\ The opening words of thejsixJJL-hjoofe Bk. iv. in the old order are 

rjn their most suitable connexion when following directly upon the 

1 iv (vn). 17. n. see . (1113). 

2 v (vm). 5 8, 6 4 with notes : cp. 3 iv (vn). 17. u. 

//. on iv (vn). 17. ii (966). No weight 4 Cp. . on n. 6. 14. 

can be given to v (vni). 7. 13 f., as the 5 Cp. n. on in. 3. 6. 

passage is conjectured to be spurious ; 6 Cp. Exc. I at the end of Bk. n. 


descripjioiL of the ideal state. _The task of Politics, we read, is not 
simply confined to an examination of the absolutely (aVXcos) best con 
stitution. It equally includes the determination of what is best on the 
average (TarT^Xefcrrat^-Tm^^t); and of the best constitution under the 
given circumstances" (CK rw mmpx ^ 7 )? or in other words the best for 

!i given people or a given population. If finally it happens that even 
tls~ourof~the "question, political science has to treat of the best 
possible form of some worse constitution ; and hence must investigate 
all possible species and even sub-species of constitutions<r""TrIe~lrn73- 
book, for exarrrpte, spoke~"oT"democracy and oligarch}^ this is now cor- 
"rected l>y the statement that there are several subordinate varieties of 
15oth u But while those fundamental distinctions of the third book are 
I again resumed, we are expressly told in c. 2 that the first problem has 
already been solved by an account of the absolutely best constitution, 
or, what is the same thing, of monarchy and aristocracy proper; thus 
only the remaining normal constitutions and their corruptions have still 
to be discussed. The order in which these stand is as follows: mixed or 
sc^called Aristocracies 1 , Polity (noXtreto), Democracy, Oligarchy, Ty 
ranny 2 . The problems to be solved are as follows; to determine (i) 
nowmany subordinate kinds of constitutions there are; (2) what is on 
the average the best constitution; (3) for what different sorts of people 
the different forms are adapted; (4) how we ought to set to work in 
regulating each form of democracy and of oligarchy; and, last of all, 
(5) what are the causes which overthrow and the means to preserve the 
various constitutions. Thus, first of all, we here find from Aristotle 
himself an express corroboration of the view that the seventh and eighth 
books (old order) came fourth and fifth in the work as he wrote it : 
and in c. 7 2, he once more repeats the same declaration, that the 
absolutely best constitution discussed in those books alone deserves to 
be called Aristocracy in the strict sense of the word; just as the interpo 
lator of c. 3 4, refers to this part of the work under the name of the 
"discussions on Aristocracy" (eV rots irepl rrjv apio-TOKpcmW), and so 
must still have had the original order before him. In the next place the 
order given in the above arrangement is adhered to most strictly in 
the exposition which follows. 

For setting aside c. 3 and c. 4 i 19, which certainly do not 
contradict this procedure, but, as was just remarked, can hardly 3 be by 

1 al 6vofJM^6fJxvau, ApiffroKpartat VI (iv). 4 (1154), 8; 4 i, 4 (1164), 5, 6, 
9. 10: see note on vi (iv). 2. 4 . 8 (1176), 12 (1182, 1183), 13 (1185) 

2 See the note on vi (iv). i. 4 (1116). 15 (1187), 17 (1189), 19, 20. 

3 See the notes on vi (iv). 3 i, 2, 


Aristotle himself, there is, first, an enumeration (i) in c. 4 20 31 of 
the four varieties of Democracy and at the beginning of c. 5, i 3, of 
the four varieties of Oligarchy passing from one resembling Polity to 
one which approaches Tyranny ; then, c. 6, it is shown why there can 
only be four varieties for each of these two constitutions : next follows 
a discussion of mixed or spurious Aristocracy in its two varieties, when 
mixed with democratic and oligarchical, or merely with democratic 
elements, c. 7; cc. 8, 9, treat of the constitution most nearly allied to 
this last, Polity (IToXtTeta) or equal combination of Oligarchy and 
TJerribcracy ; and c. 10 of Tyranny and the forms in which it blends 
with_Monarchy, Then (2) c. n presents IIoArreta in its character as" 
! the rule of the well-to-do middle class, as the best constitution on the 
j average. The next investigation (3) breaks off unfinished in 5 of 
c. 12 l : the passage which follows (12 6, 13 i n), i.e. all the fol 
lowing chapter except 12, does not belong to this subject but to the 
regulation of Polity : had it been more correctly edited it would have 
been worked into c. 9 to which I would transpose it. Only one circum 
stance is out of harmony : in the order which has come down to us, 
(5) the theory of revolutions and the safeguards of constitutions does 
not come last of all, but takes up the whole of (old) Bk. v> while (4) the 
regulation of the different forms of Democracy and Aristocracy does not 
appear till the first four chapters of (old) Bk. vi. The last three chap 
ters of (old) Bk. iv, cc. 14 1 6, are taken up with fundamental con 
siderations of a general kind on the regulation and organization of all 
possible constitutions, except Monarchy, Tyranny, and true Aristocracy, 
according to each of the three authorities in the state. Thus the 
deliberative or decreeing body is treated in c. 14, the administrative 
body or the organisation of the officials and magistrates in c. 15, 
the judicial power in c. 16. In accordance with this it has been 
proposed to transpose the (old) Sixth Book before the (old) Fifth, so 
that the former becomes the (new) Seventh and the latter the (new) 
Eighth : and this order has been followed in the text 2 . If it is right 

1 See the note there, (1315). interlace questions (4) and (5) directly 

~ Hildenbrand op. c. p. 372 ff. defends contradicts Aristotle s express announce- 

the received order hereby saying that Aris- ment above, makes this whole announce- 

totle intended to lay down in vi (iv). cc. ment refer only to the contents of Books 

14 1 6 the elements of the constitutions IV and V of the old order : in these two 

and then in the first place in Book v of books Aristotle, as he thinks, gives a 

the old order, went on to describe their complete discussion of the theory of the 

practical working, because upon this de- imperfect constitutions with regard to 

pends the right combination of the ele- their general underlying principles; in the 

ments which follow in the (old) Book vi. (old) Book VI he acids a more special ex- 

Zeller on the other hand op. c. II ii 675 ff., position. I have explained in the Jahrb. 

evidently with the right view that thus to /. Philol. ci. 1870. 343346, 349 f. why 


it must certainly be assumed that the four references back to the (old) 
Fifth Book which we find in the (old) Sixth do not, at least in their 
present form, belong to Aristotle, but at the earliest to the author of 
the later edition which has come down to us. One of them, vn (vi). 
4. 15, is in fact so little suited to its context that it at once proclaims 
itself to be a spurious insertion l . Two of the others, vn (vi). i $ i 
and i 10, may be removed, at least without much harm, on the 
same grounds 2 . But the fourth, vn (vi). 5. 2, is so firmly embedded 
in the context that there is no resource but to assume that the inter 
polator has changed the future, which Aristotle himself used here, into 
the past ;! ; an assumption quite as possible for the third passage as that 
of an interpolation 4 . The two parts of the work thus moved into 
immediate proximity the three concluding chapters of Bk. vi (iv) and 
the first seven chapters of Bk. vn (vi) then become the general and 
particular parts of the same discussion :> . But we miss the account, 
promised at the beginning of Bk. vii (vi), of the possible combinations 
which may arise when in one and the same state the several political 
authorities are regulated according to the principles of different consti 
tutions, vn (vi). i. 3 f. G Nor is this the only defect. In the eighth 
and last chapter of Bk. vn (vi) the theory of the organization of the 
executive still remains a rough sketch, not yet worked out in detail. 
It certainly brings to a real solution a part of the questions merely 
proposed or mentioned provisionally in vi (iv). c. i6 7 : but it contributes 
hardly anything towards a more thorough solution of a problem expressly 
mentioned there vi (iv). 15 14, as not yet satisfactorily solved ; namely 
a discussion of the differences between magistrates in different consti 
tutions ; while it omits altogether any mention of the influence of the 
various departments of public business on the mode of election to 
different offices, which was also expressly promised there, vi (iv). 15. 
22 8 . But these are inconsiderable defects, and if on the transposition 

I cannot accept this solution: the main chapters contain nothing but repetitions 

points of my explanation will be found of propositions enlarged upon long be- 

with some modifications in the notes on fore; but this statement is not proved, 

vi (iv). 2 5 (1143), 6 (1144). and is quite incorrect. 

1 See the note there (1424). 6 E.g. the deliberative body and the 

2 Only in the latter passage the 5 election of magistrates on oligarchical, 
which follows must be changed into 817, the lawcourts on aristocratical, princi- 
or else the whole of the following clause pies. Cp. the last note (1488) at the end 
vvvl 8 ra aubfMTa...\{yw/j,ev expunged. of Bk. vii (vi). 

3 See the note there, and Spengel 7 Cp. upon this point the more precise 
Ueber die Politik 36 ff. explanation in the note on vi (iv.) 15. i 

4 In that case the change of 5 into 817, (1343)- 

slight as it is, will be unnecessary. 8 Oncken /. c. complains of the way 

5 See the note on VI (iv). 2. 6 (1144). in which this sketch, modelled in its main 
Oncken, op. c. II. 253, thinks these seven features on the organization of the Attic 


proposed this book, vn (vi), no longer forms the conclusion of the 
discussion on imperfect forms of the state it will be most obvious to 
treat them like other spaces left blank in the course of, and not at the 
end of, principal sections : where we have more reason to conjecture 
subsequent losses than to infer that the execution on Aristotle s own 
part was deficient 

. For the highly artistic construction of Book vm (v) it will be 
sufficient to refer to the Analysis] on the transpositions necessary 
even in this book, as well as on the spurious passages in all the books, 
to the Commentary^, It would be superfluous to commend to the 
thoughtful reader the ripe political wisdom shown in the account of the 
forms of government actually established ; and this eighth book in 
particular preeminently reveals the statesman 2 . In his picture of the 
despot of the shrewder type who skilfully copies the genuine king, 
vm (v). ii. 17 34, it really looks as if he had anticipated with 
prophetic eye the second French Empire and the third Napoleon. 
Can these precepts on despotism (rvpawi^) have actually been read 
by the latter and turned to account ? That question no one perhaps 
is in a position to answer. 

There is yet another fact which quite apart from this may be empha 
sized here. As Teichmiiller especially has shown 3 , Aristotle recognised 
even in his day the importance of the influence which the mode of life 
and the social relations of a nation exercise upon the form of its 
political development and of its constitution. Yet Zeller s remarks 4 , 
that he nevertheless does not speak of civil society as distinct from the 
state, and that the different principles of classification which he assigns 
for the forms of government will not quite blend into a unity, appear to 
be by no means completely answered by Teichmuller s explanations. 
It is true that in in. 5. 9 ff., iv (vn). 7 f, Aristotle draws a definite dis 
tinction between social relations and the political relations proper which 

government, follows without any intro- is therefore (see p. 59 n. 5) an ungrounded 

duction upon what precedes. This is assertion. See the note on VIII (vi). i. i 

quite true, but he appears to overlook (1379 b )- 

dfj.a re -rrepl e/cetVwf ei n \ourbv, ou x^P ov 1 [See also below, pp. 93 ff.] 

Tri<TK\{sa(Tdai in the announcement of the 2 Cp. Hildenbrand op. c. 469 486; 

contents vn (vi). i. r, which points to a Zeller op. c. n ii 750; Oncken op. c. II. 

supplement with such additions ; since in 241252; Henkel op. c. 91: Van der 

the execution it is the first four chapters Rest op. c. 519 ff. 

that answer^to the following words /ecu rbv 3 In Die aristotelische Eintheihmg der 

oiKelov Kairbv <rv(j,<})povTa.Tpbirov airoSovvcu Verfassimgsformen 12 ff (St Petersburg 

irpos eKaa-T-rji , but in reverse order. That 1859. 8). Compare the review by Su- 

the whole book is a regular medley of semihl Jahrb.f. Philol. cm. 1871 p. 137 

motley elements, which, although per- sqq., from which is taken all of import- 

haps of the same date, certainly never ance in what follows. 

stood in the same original connexion 4 op. c. n ii 699, 705 foil., 749. 


in various ways depend upon them: vi (iv). 4 20 22, 6 1 3, 
1 2 2 ; vii (vi). 4 13, 814; cp. in. 1 2 7 f. ; iv (vn). cc. 8, 9 ; 
vi (iv). cc. 3, 4. But he nowhere attributes to the former independent 
importance, or a separate province of their own : they are generally 
regarded only as the condition which is requisite in order that the life 
of the state may take this or that form. But this leaves the distinction 
imperfect. In general, where Aristotle discovers a new conception he 
also coins his own term for it, or at any rate remarks that there is as 
yet no appropriate word for it in Greek. But here, in keeping with this 
imperfection, there is no such remark with reference to civil society ; 
but, as Teichmiiller l himself quite rightly observes, the word city 
or state (770X15) is sometimes used in a narrower sense to exclude 
the merely social elements, sometimes with a wider meaning to includ 
them. Further, the distinction of Monarchy, Aristocracy and Polity, \ 
and so also amongsTTrTe degenerate forms, that of Tyranny, Oligarchy 
ancl "Democracy, merely according to the number of the rulers (in. 
,7. 2 f.), is certainly only provisional. Immediately afterwards (in c. 8, 
see above "p. 38) it is described as something merely accidental in the 
case of Democracy and Oligarchy, which in the extreme case might 
even be absent, the real ground of the distinction being poverty and 
wealth. Indeed later on the mere distinction in number is, in the case 
of Aristocracy and Polity, completely abandoned. Even in the ideal 
Aristocracy the whole civic body rules itself; and although here, as was 
remarked above (p. 54), the real governing body of fully qualified 
citizens forms a minority of the whole number, yet one can see no 
reason why in a spurious Aristocracy the actual civic body must 
necessarily be a smaller number than in a Polity. Thus the only 
normal constitutions proper that remain are ideal Monarchy and ideal 
Aristocracy, see vi (iv). 7 2, 8 i ; spurious Aristocracies and Polity 
only occupy the place of intermediate or transitional forms between the 
normal constitutions and their corruptions. The so-called Aristocracies 
are said to be mixed forms combining aristocratic with democratic 
elements or both with Oligarchy, vi (iv). 7 4, 8 9 ; why there should 
not also be among them combinations of aristocratic and oligarchical 
elements 2 without democratic admixture, is not quite clear. Polity 
appears as a mixture of Oligarchy and Democracy : if this is the case, 
both these extremes, to which it is intermediate, must be considered 
to be perverted forms of it, instead of Oligarchy being a corruption of 
Aristocracy and Democracy of Polity, as was said at first (in. 7. i foil.) 
and again repeated vi (iv). 8. i. There are however even later passages 

1 /. c. 14 ff. 2 See the note on vi (iv). 7. 4 (1238). 


in which Oligarchy is defined as a corruption of Aristocracy; and his 
qualification of prevailing views, that it is the rule of the rich rather than 
of the minority, is in some measure ignored vm (v). 7. i. 1 In Polity then 
no aristocratic element is recognised ; for the principle of Aristocracy is 
virtue or superior excellence 2 , while the only excellence discoverable in 
Polity is superiority in war; in. 7. 4, comp. vi (iv). 13. 7 foil. 3 This is 
just what Aristotle censures in Sparta, u. 9. 34 f, iv (vn) 14 15 if. 
i (cp. 2 9) ; and consequently he ought not to have reckoned the 
Spartan constitution, as he does, with spurious aristocracies, but with 
Polities. But on the other hand how should Polities be counted 
amongst normal constitutions of even the second rank unless a certain 
excellence of the citizens was also required in them ? Or is the public 
education, for which Sparta is praised, v(vin). i. 4 1 , to make the 
difference? But there was nothing of the sort at Carthage, and yet 

Aristotle classes the constitution there with aristocracies and not with 


Polities 5 . Again, the rule of the majority and of the minority is repre 
sented as quite indispensable to the notions of oligarchy and democracy, 
vi (iv). 4 ^ 5, 6; while in vm (v). 7 59, vi (iv). 7 4, 8 3 ff., 
Aristotle is made to adopt at one moment to adopt and then at the 
next to contradict a view which is altogether incompatible with such 
definitions, viz. that the mixed constitutions which incline more to 
democracy should be called Polities, and those which incline more to 
\ oligarchy, Aristocracies r \ Such inconsistencies would certainly be too 
glaring even for a far less able thinker. They are not made a whit more 
intelligible by the fact that the conception of Oligarchy oscillates some 
what between a government of wealth, of birth, and of a minority : 
on the contrary they bear the clearest marks of interpolation 7 . But 
further : the best of the four varieties of democracy is a departure from 
Aristotle s conception of democracy, the government of the rich by the 
poor, for it represents both as sharing the government equally, vi (iv). 
4. 22. Even the conception of a degenerate constitution as government 
in the interest of the governors is not at all applicable here, if we follow 
the description given in vn (vi). 4 i 7, nor yet in the case of the 
best and most moderate oligarchy. Thus both should be reckoned 

1 See note there, and on vm (v). 7. 6 6 It is a strange misconception of 

(1599)- Oncken s op. c. 11. 236 f., to attribute 

- See the note on in. 7. 3 (536). the propositions contained in vi (iv). 8 

3 See the note on in. 7. 4 (538). 3, 4 to Aristotle himself, whereas in 

4 So Nic. Elh. i. 13. 3, 1102 a 10 f., fact the whole chapter is written to re- 
x. 9. 13, nSoaagff. fute them. 

5 vi (iv). 7 4. ri, vm (v). 7 4 and 7 See the notes on vi (iv). 4 4 
also perhaps 12 15. In n. n 5 the (1164) > 7 4 (1238) : vn (vi). 27 (1402): 
expression is more hesitating. vm (v). 7. 6 (1599). 


amongst the normal constitutions of the second class : and even the 
second and third varieties of oligarchy would have to be included with 
them as forming the lowest types of normal constitutions ; since they 
are still governed by the laws, and so are constitutional, not arbitrary, 
governments 1 . It is surprising how Teichmiiller 8 could overlook the 
fact that on his own showing, the social element whether the pre 
dominating employment is agriculture and cattle-rearing, or trade and 
industry, or something intermediate, the pursuit of both equally only 
suffices to distinguish three varieties of democracy, so that Aristotle is 
obliged to take other points of view in order to make out four. In 
the case of oligarchy the distinction, which Aristotle certainly makes, 
between the rich nobles and merchants or manufacturers who have 
I made money, does not come into consideration to mark the distinction 
! which he draws between the four varieties of this constitution. In place 
of it we have merely the ever increasing growth of wealth and its accu 
mulation in fewer and fewer hands, and here again in the account which 
Teichmiiller 3 himself gives of these varieties this is precisely the case. 
In the whole scheme of the successive grades of constitutions from the 
Ideal Monarchy downwards, through the genuine and spurious Aristo 
cracies, Polity, first Democracy, first Oligarchy, &c., down to the most 
extreme Democracy, then the most extreme Oligarchy (government by 
Dynasts) 4 , and finally Tyranny, this being the ultimate stage of develop 
ment 5 , there is no place where the historical forms of the monarchy 
could be fitted in. Lastly, from what precedes it is seen that the early 
and provisional statement of the relation of the constitutions to one 
another, in. c. 7, has not simply been modified by the further course 
of the discussions, but that in the end hardly any part of it is left 
standing; so that it may well be asked whether under these circum 
stances Aristotle was justified in putting it forward even provisionally. 
No doubt all these vacillations, inequalities, and contradictions, affect 
the husk rather than the core of Aristotle s political theory : indeed 
a certain portion of them are by no means to be regarded as actual 
mistakes. The main supports of this political system are, that the 
unqualified principle of democracy and the absolute principle of oli 
garchy, the latter more even than the former, introduce the same sort 
of arbitrary government, which comes to a head in Tyranny that 
a good middle class is the foundation of a healthy political life : and 

1 Comp. Oncken op. c. n. -252, who cracy from a polity, 
however is not altogether right ; he goes - op. c. 18 f. 

too far in maintaining that hence under A op. c. 20 f. 

certain conditions an oligarchy does not 4 See n. on u. 10. 13. 

differ from an aristocracy, nor a demo- 5 See n. on VI (iv). u. 21 (1305). 



, their strength has outlasted the storms of centuries. Poets like Pho- 
* cylides and Euripides (the latter with a political intention), had, it is 
true, sung the praise of the middle class 1 ; but Aristotle is the first 
thinker who makes the functions of the middle class in society and in 
politics the foundation of his practical political theories, and of his 
1 explanation of political history. His love of the mean in all things is 
nowhere so systematically and so consistently carried out as here 2 . 
He forcibly depicts the equalizing force of the well-to-do middle class 
and the permanence of the constitution where it is most strongly repre 
sented, that is, IIoXiTeta. The next best condition is one where it is at 
least as strong as one of the two contending extremes, rich and poor, 
and thereby is enabled to stave off the decisive victory of either. Even 
then it is possible to maintain, according to circumstances, either another 
Polity, or at least a law-abiding and moderate Democracy or Oligarchy, 
as the case may be. But where the middle class is weaker than either 
separately a perpetual struggle prevails between the two extremes, with 
never-ending revolutions, and the end is the fatal exhaustion of both : 
while Tyranny succeeds to their inheritance 3 . 

But the more essential the part played by Polity in the philosopher s 
political system, the more surprising does it appear that his remarks on 
this form of government cannot be combined in all their details into a 
consistent whole, a complete picture which shall be quite distinct. At 
one time he represents it as being in accordance with an aristocracy and 
a polity to fill all offices by election, without a property qualification ; 
in the case of polity, therefore, by no higher qualification than is gene 
rally requisite here for actual citizenship vi (iv). 9. 5. At another time 
however the application of the lot, either alone or accompanied by 
election with restriction of the right of voting or being voted for, vi (14). 
1 5 1 9 f, is said to be characteristic of Polity. This contradiction may 
not be so important perhaps as at first sight appears 4 ; yet we are all 
the more surprised to find in the same chapter the restriction of the 
popular assembly to the mere election of the council and the magistrates 
represented as characteristic of Polity, vi (iv). 14 io 5 , and then to hear 
(15) that usually in Polities the resolutions of the popular assembly 
may be annulled by the council and the questions which they affect 
brought before the former assembly again and again, until it passes a 
resolution conformably". In the same place exactly the opposite pro 
cedure is recommended as more just, and that, too, for Democracy: 

1 See n. on vi (iv). n. 9. (i370- 

2 Oncken op. c. n. p. 225. See n. on vi (iv). 9. 5 (1255). 

3 Oncken op. c. n. 227, 228. 6 g ee Wi on VI ( IV )_ I4- j^ (1340). 

4 See the note on vi (iv). 15. 21 


thus then the latter, by adopting it, would become even better than the 
ordinary Polities. Must we here recognise another of those additions 
whereby the school obscured the master s work 1 ? Who again can fail 
to be surprised at the great concession which is made to unqualified 
popular rule and paid democracy, vi(iv) 9 2, 13 5, when Aristotle 
states that the combination of the two measures, payment of the poor 
for attendance in the popular assembly the council and the law-courts, 
and punishment of the rich for their non-attendance, is appropriate to 
Polity ? It may be that he is thinking only of those Polities in which 
the middle class is not numerous enough to maintain a decided prepon 
derance as compared with the two extreme parties, where consequently 
its deficiency must be artificially made good in this way 2 . But this, to 
say the least, has never been expressly mentioned by Aristotle :! , and 
there is all the more reason to hold 1 , that in the end he has approxi 
mated, much more than he himself believes, to unqualified government 
by the people, and that his IloXireta is nothing but Attic democracy 
without its unfavourable side. Aristotle himself^remarks, in. 15. 13, 
that when once states have grown more populous and cities increased in 
size it is not easy to call into life any constitution except a democracy ; 
and in vn (vi). 5 5, 6, that since then even the older moderate patri 
archal democracy of peasant proprietors has come to an end. It is a 
result that he laments, but he is aware that it is unalterable. All that 
remains is so to shape the most advanced democracy itself that it may 
lose as far as may be its arbitrary, despotic character and wear the 
appearance of something like IIoAn-eia. This may be done by regu 
lating for the advantage of all the system of payment, which cannot 
be altogether avoided here, and by checking the demagogues in their 
practices of vexatious accusations. The detailed proposals which Aris 
totle makes in this direction vn (vi), 5 38, 6 4; vin (v). 8. 15 fif, 
9 5 IT ff> prove his lively interest in this question. Oncken 5 lias 
well said : " Either renounce freedom and equality, that is, the essential 
" nature of the constitutional state in Hellas, and give up the community 
" to the despotic rule of violent oligarchs ; or make the whole civic body 
" legislators and judges, summon the rich to take honorary magistracies, 
" compensate the poor for the service of watching over them. It was 

1 The practical proposals in vi (iv). 14 the Polity, to which Oncken appeals, if 
1115, which Krohn refuses to attri- these words are rightly taken see the 
bute to Aristotle, would certainly not be note there (1269) > anc ^ on 9 3 ( I2 54)- 
missed, if omitted altogether. 4 With Oncken op. c. n. p. 240, though 

2 As Oncken thinks op. c. n. 239. his assertions require considerable modi- 

3 Nor can it be inferred from the fol- fication in accordance with what is stated 
lowing words in vi (iv). 13. 7 on the in n. 4 on p. 41. 

amount of the property qualification in 5 op. c. II. 259, 260. 

H. 5 


" the only alternative which could be found. This once conceded, even 
" an opponent could not deny that the embodiment of the Athenian 
" spirit in Athens was without parallel in Hellas. With all its failings 
" it was the only state in which the political idea of the Hellenes at- 
" tained to complete expression, the community in which dwelt the 
"heart and soul of the Hellenic race ; with whose power and liberty the 
" national life of Hellas became extinct. With deep dislike Aristotle 
" watches the great multitude in this mighty city reigning and ruling 
" like an all-powerful monarch ; few there are whose observation traces 
" the mischiefs of its constitution so clearly to their causes. But the 
" idea of this state conquered even him. He investigated, observed, 
"described 1 Athens, its history and its organization, as no one ever 
" did before him. The study which he devoted to it was the only 
" homage which he voluntarily paid it : no word of acknowledgment 
" escapes him. But throughout it receives from him involuntary hom- 
" age, since it is the only state whose actual life he could or did take 
" as a model for his own political design. He imagined himself stand- 
" ing as a physician at a sick bed ; but the patient revealed, what no 
" healthy subject could teach him, the very idea of the Hellenic state." 



"There are notices in the Politics of the Sacred War, vm. (v). 4. 7, 
" as of something in the past ; of Phalaecus expedition to Crete, which 
"took place at the end of it, Ol. 108, 3 (B.C. 346) 2 , as a recent event, 
" vecocrrt TroXe/xos ^eviKos 8iafic/3r]Kcv ets rrjv vrja-ov, II. 10. 16 : lastly, of 
"the assassination of Philip (B.C. 336), vm. (v). 10. 16", without any 
"intimation that it had but very lately happened ." On the other hand 
the passage n. 10. 16 appears to have been written before B.C. 333" . 
The Politics as a whole must have been written later than the Nico- 
machean Ethics^ which is quoted six times, n. 2^4; in. 9 3, 12 i ; 
iv (vn). 13 5, 7 ; vi (iv). ii. 3 , and earlier than the Poetics which is 
announced as to follow in v (vm.) 7. 3 7 . 

1 In his Constitution of Athens in the the Poetics, p. 1 1 f. lleitz objection (in 

IIoXiTetcu: see above, p/35 #. 3. Die vcrlorenen Schriften 99 ff.) there 

2 Diod. xvi. 62. mentioned in n. 2 on p. 12 has in the 

3 Cp. the note there (1673). meantime been answered in detail by 

J Zeller op. cit. n ii 154 n. ( 4 ). Vahlen Sitzungsber. der Wiener Akad. 

5 See the note there (375). LXVII. 1874. 293 298: he has made it 

6 See nn. on these passages. tolerably certain that the chapter on 

7 Cp. the Introduction to my edition of KdOapvis in question, which is now lost, 

DATE. 67 

It must indeed be admitted, and has already occasionally been 
pointed out above, that a part of the inconsistencies in the work were, 
from Aristotle s general position, inevitable, nay even characteristic; 
that on the most careful revision he would never have detected them. 
Others again are such as might easily have escaped his notice. Yet 
after all, enough inconsistencies repetitions and other discrepancies 
remain 1 to compel the inference that not only did Aristotle never give 
the finishing touches to this work, but that he must have been a long 
time over it, taking it up at intervals and with many interruptions 
through other works. In consequence of this he had altered his views 
on many points, and had not always the details of the earlier portions 
fully present to his mind when he came to write the later ones. The 
view here taken would be materially confirmed if the larger sections 
which are wanting were never really written, the work never having been 
completed as a whole. 

It will be hardly possible to substantiate a well-grounded objection 
to the Aristotelian origin of the six citations of the Ethics-, and yet that 
work itself 3 calls the theory developed in it not Ethics but Politics, and 
the same title is confirmed by passages of the Poetics and Rhetoric . For 
the intermediate expression of the Rhetoric (i. 4. 5, 1359 b 10 f), r\ -n-tpl 
rd yOr) TroAm/0/, is here our guide, by making Ethics and Politics in the 
narrower sense appear as parts of Politics in the wider sense. The matter 
is thus stated with perfect correctness by the author of the Magna 
Moralia at the commencement of his work 5 , and Aristotle himself 
explains in the last chapter of the Ethics that a full realization of the 
principles laid down in it can only be expected from political education 
and legislation. 

stood at the conclusion of the whole (1450) : 

treatise after the discussion on Comedy, Bk. VIII (V). i i (149.!)? .3 ( I 54)j 

and not where I looked for it. Yet my 3 4(1511) ; 5 9 (1559) : 10 3 (1649), 

remarks I.e. p. 8 still retain their force. 5 (1650), 6 (1657) ; 1 1 16 (1731); 12 

1 Comp. the notes on Bk. II. 4 4 (149); u (1767), 14(1777). 

5ii 2 (i53), H ( l6 4); 6 15 (215), 2 See however the notes on iv (vn). 13 

18(220); 10 8 (366) : 5, 7 (876,879,881): and //. (1287) on vi 

Bk. III. 4 5 (471), 9 (478) : (iv). 1 1. 3 in regard to the citations there. 

Bk. IV (VII). 13 4 (872), 8 (881); 3 i. 2. 3 1094 a 24 f. 

14 6 (899): i. 3- 5 1095 a 2, 

Bk. V (VIII). 3 6 (993), ii (1000); i. 4. i 1095 a 14 f.; 

5 4 (1024), 15(1041); 6 14 (1079): cp. i. 13. 2. 1 102 a 7 ff., 

Bk. VI (IV). i 7 (11245); 2 3 vii. ii. i. ii52b i f. 

(1140), 5(1143); 4 21 (1194, 1198), 4 Poet. 6. 16. 1450 b 6 sqq. (cp. note 

22 (1199 1201), 24 (1203), 25 71 to my edition of this work). Rlict. i. 

(1204) ; 6 4 1223; 7 i (1230 b); 9 9 t. 7. 1356 a 26 sqq. 

(1265) ; 14 3 (1319), 9 (1331). 10 5 Brandis op. c. II ii 1335 n. certainly 

(1334), 13 (i337) J 4 ( J 338); 15 16 expounds his words differently; but sec 

(1366), 19 (1369), 21 (1371) ; Zeller op. c. II ii 608 n. 

Bk. VII (VI). i 6 (1383); 7 i 



To regard the EtJiics and Politics however as forming the first and 
second parts of one and the same work, as has now and then been done, 
is certainly not correct 1 . Yet this view is undoubtedly very old. For 
it must even have been adopted by the writer who at the close of 
the Ethics appended that introduction to the Politics now to be read 
there which may be translated somewhat as follows 2 : "Since then 
"previous writers have omitted to make legislation the subject of their 
"enquiries, it might perhaps be as well that we should ourselves take 
u this subject into consideration together with the theory of the consti- 
" tution generally, in order that the philosophy of Man may be as far as 
"possible brought to a conclusion. First then let us try to review 
"whatever has been rightly stated at various times by our predecessors; 
"next from a comparison of the constitutions to investigate what it is 
" which preserves and destroys states and individual constitutions, and 
"from what causes some are ordered well and others ill. For when 
"this has been considered we should perhaps be more likely to gain a 
"comprehensive view not only of what constitution is absolutely the 
" best, but also how each separate constitution should be regulated, and 
" what laws and customs it must adopt (in order to be the best of its 
"kind). Let us begin then with our discussion." 

Schlosser long since, with good reason, doubted the genuineness of 
this patchwork in the forcible and cogent remark 3 : "there is no coher- 
"ence between the close of this passage and the beginning of the 
" Politics., and Aristotle does not follow the plan here marked out." The 
opening of the Politics is only intelligible when regarded as belonging 
to an independent work which starts from the notion of its own subject- 
matter, the state. We are not told that something similar was stated 
rather differently at the commencement of the Ethics ; the state is here 
first constructed as the all-comprehensive association which has the 
highest good for its end : nor is there the least intimation that for the 
realization of unimipeded vrtuous activity, the full meaning of this 
highest good, we were referred in the last chapter of the EtJiics to the 
Politics. The supposed transition then is pure fancy with nothing here 

1 So recently by Nickes for example. TroXets /cat ra iroia. e/cdcrras r(av TroXtraw* , 

- Nic. Elk. X. 9 22, 23 1181 b 12 Kal did rivets alrias at fj.ev /caXws al v Se rov- 

f. TrapaXnrovrtov odv rCov Ttporepuv dve- vavriov TroAtreiWrar deuprjdevruv yap 

pevvrjrov rb Trepl rr/s vo/modecrias, avrovs rovrwvrdx dv fj.d\\ov (rvvi.8oifji.ei Kal iroia 

c Trio Ktyacrdai fj.d\\ov fieXriov t crws, /cat TroXtreta apiary, Kal irus endury ra-^Oelaa^ 

6 Xws 5r) Trepl TroXtret as, OTTCOS els dvvafj.iv i) Kal rt crt VOUOLS /cat e0eai -^pw^ivr]. \eyw[jt,cv 

Trepl ra dvOpwTTiva 0tXocro0fa reXetw#7?. o$v dpdfj.evoi. 

trpurov fj.ev odv et rt Kara fj.epos eipyrai 3 In his translation of the Politics I. 

/caXws VTTO rwv Trpoyevcarre puv Treipa6wp.ev xviii. His further conjectures need not 

e7reX#eti>, elra e/c r(av crvvyyaevcov TroXtretaSi/ be refuted now. 
rd Trola <ruei Kal <f)6dpei. rds 


to support it. In keeping with the announcement contained in it 
Aristotle should rather have begun with the second book 1 , making what 
is contained in Bk. vm (v). come next, and then developing the 
contents of iv (vn), v (vm), and lastly of vi (iv). and vn (vi). 
What must be understood by a comparison of constitutions we see 
clearly from x 9 20, 21, 1181 a 16, 17, b y 2 ; at the same time we also 
see how much the interpolator has misunderstood the expression he bor 
rows. There it denotes the combination of different laws and elements 
of different constitutions into a new constitution and new legislation : 
here it can only denote an accumulation of information on the consti 
tutions of as many different states as possible and on the history of 
their development, because only from that can we gather what is here 
intended to be gathered from this comparison 3 . That before Aris 
totle no scientific enquiry into legislation existed is palpably untrue; 
and had the absence of such enquiry been the only inducement to the 
composition of his work, how could this have sufficed to make him lay 
down " the theory of the constitution generally"? That no writers had 
been found to elaborate this is not asserted even here ; on the con 
trary we are promised an exposition and estimate of all the facts already 
discovered by earlier enquirers. Even the words Kal oAws &r/ Trepl 
TToXtretas contain an un- Aristotelian idea, for they imply that Legislation 
must be a part of the theory of the Constitution, while to Aristotle, we 
have seen, both are parts of Politics proper. Of the incredible mode of 
expression in the concluding words from /cat TTOLO. iroAiTeia apumy onwards 
we will say nothing : it is sufficient to remark that the interpolator has 
left out just what is most important, which in the translation above 
has been added within brackets. In short, to whatever period this 
interpolation belongs its author did not himself know what he was 
about, and it would be for the most part lost labour to seek to discover 
"method in his madness." 

That in spite of their close connexion 4 the Ethics and the Pol Hies are 
regarded by Aristotle as two independent works, is sufficiently shown by 
the way in which the one is quoted in the other. Until sufficient reason 

1 For the interpretation which Nickes, T&V Tro\tTeiwv al <rvi>ayuyai, where the 
/. c. pp. 29, 30, puts upon the concluding expression certainly tends to pass over 
words, "Let us then follow this state"- into the meaning put upon it by the in- 
" ment of ours, but only after prefixing terpolator, but goes no farther. 

"a commencement dealing with other * This disposes of the unhappy at- 

" matters," is not calculated to inspire tempt of Nickes I.e. 25 f. to interpret the 

confidence. passage. In his refutation of the earlier 

2 ou5 w $OJ>TO (sc. ol (TO(f>i<TTaL) pq.5iov attempts he is on the whole successful. 
flvai TO vofj-oderrja-ai crwayaybvTt TOI)S ev- 4 As Zeller observes op. c. II ii 104 f. 
doKi/movvTas TWV i>6/j.<j)i>, and rCiv v6/j.fiv Kal n. (i). 


is adduced for transferring the first chapter of Bk. iv (vn). from Aristotle 
to Theophrastos or some one else 1 , the yet more unequivocal mention 
of Ethics there ( 13) as another study/ ercpas... cr^oA?? s 2 , has the most 
decisive importance : although the term another study would mean 
no more when so applied than it does in the case of the Prior or 
Pure and Posterior or Applied Analytics, for example. Yet no one has 
tried to show from the close connexion between them that these latter 
treatises are merely parts of one and the same work. In fact Politics 
in Aristotle s sense, so far as the state according to its idea is a means 
of training to human virtue and therefore to happiness, is nothing but 
Applied Ethics : the problem of Pure Ethics being to show wherein 
virtue and happiness consist. But since this idea of the state could 
only lie truly realized in the absolutely best state, which does not as 
yet exist, which even if it did exist would only be one state amongst 
many since therefore the virtue of the citizen is dissociated from the 
virtue of the man Ethics has to deal with the moral activity of the 
individual, Politics with that of the state". 

In Aristotle s classification of the sciences, both studies, in common 
with Poetics, have a somewhat uncertain place and worth assigned 
them, as Zeller 4 and Walter 5 have shown : nor does it appear that 
Aristotle cleared this up sufficiently to himself, or even tried to do so. 
It is a peculiar weakness of his Ethics that it has no purely scientific 
importance for him ; it merely serves as an introduction to practical 
morality 1 : but again, as he himself explains, the direct value of mere theo 
retical instruction for this purpose is very slight, nay, quite insignificant 7 . 
Yet practical insight (^poV^o-t?), without which there is no moral virtue 8 , 
can be materially promoted by Ethics 9 , although it does not by any 
means coincide with Ethics in subject-matter 10 . So too the practical 
insight of the leading statesman in political life can exist in a purely 

1 See above, p. 15 n. i. 26 b 7, and 1106 b 36 ff. ; II. c. 9. 

2 Cp. the note there (709). Comp. also Walter op. c. 151 162 who 

3 Cp. Zeller op. cit. n ii 104 f. n. i, certainly should not have relied upon the 
182, 607 n. 3 : Oncken op. c. I. 164 ff. probably spurious chapter II. 7. 

4 op. c. II ii 176 185. 8 Cp nn% i n T< 5< 9(45),!. 13. 6(112). 

5 Die Lchre von der praktischen Ver- 9 Nic. Eth. i. 2. 2 io94a22ff., i. 
nunft 537 554 (Jena 1874. 8). But not 3. 7 1095 a iof., I. 4. 6 1095 b 4 13, 
every statement in that work is correct. vi. 7. 7 1 141 b 2 1 ff. Comp. Walter op. c. 

6 Nic. EtJi. i. 3 58 1095 a 3 ff., 157, 400 ff. 

ii. 2. i 1103 b 26 ff. _ Cp. Walter op. c. 10 As Zeller thinks, op. c. n.ii 608;?.; he 

151 ff. Zeller op. c. ii ii 631. has been refuted by Walter p. 151. There 

7 Nic. Eth. i. 3 58 1095 a 3 ff.; is no doubt that the passage of the Nic. 
cp. I. 9. 10 iiooaiff.; ii. i. i 1103 a Et/i. adduced by Zeller, vi. 8 14 
14 ff.; II. 4 36, 1105 a 26 b 18 ; x. 1141 b 23 1142 a n, is not by Aristotle, 
9 = x. 10 (Bekk.) : cp. Pol. iv (vn). 13. as was long ago shown by Fischer 
ir f., Nic. Eth. n. 6 48, 15 1106 a Fritzsche and Rassow. 


empirical manner without a comprehensive theory of politics ; but on 
the other hand there is much to learn from such a theory, and the great 
practical statesman will be all the greater the more he has appropriated 
it to himself. That the main value of TroXiTiKrj consists in affording this 
important contribution to the education of capable statesmen is stated 
by Aristotle in. i. i ; vi (iv). c. i ; vn (vi). 5. i ; iv (vn). 13. 5, and in 
other passages, and this fully agrees with his analogous view about 
Ethics. But his inconsistency with himself does not go so far here as 
before; rather he demands of political theory in. 8. i (cp. vi [iv]. 13. 
5), that it should exhaust all conceivable cases, even those of which it 
can be foreseen that they will seldom or never actually occur 1 . 


The comparative worth of the Manuscripts. 

This question, of which some notice will be found above 2 , has 
recently been raised anew by Busse in an excellent dissertation De 
pracsidiis einendandi Aristotelis Politica*. By a minute analysis of the 
old Latin version, Busse proves beyond all doubt that it has been 
over-estimated by Vettori and Schneider, and even by Susemihl, and 
is by no means so strictly literal or correct as they supposed \ 

To begin with, William of Moerbeke s ignorance of Greek was 
something deplorable 5 . He renders irepl TMV aTrcx^m/xeVcoi/ Trepl KT\, 
de pronunciatis de optima civ it at e ; Trpos Se rots aAAois a pud alias; 
eiriTiOto-Oai praeferri ; eViS^yueu/ praefectum populi cssc; evidently arriving 
at the meaning of a compound by the most rudimentary analysis, as ra 
dyaOd rd Trepc/xct^ra bona quae circa res bcllicai . But mere ignorance 
whether of the meaning of words or of the construction and it would 
seem as if, in n. 12. 8, he made OA^TrtWcv an accusative after rov 
qui vicit Olimpiasem 1 ; at any rate he gives super tecta for 

1 Comp. nn. on in. 8. i (542) ; in. 13. cies in William s translation and the need 

13 (601) ; vi (iv). 15. 4 (1350); see also of caution in inferences from it to the 

ill. 2 i 3. original. See also the edition of 1879, 

[Here Prof. Susemihl s own Intro- e.g. I p. 204 n. i, 210 ;/. 2. 
duction ends. The following section is 5 Yet it is an exaggeration when Roger 

mainly an attempt to present succinctly Bacon writes "ut notum est omnibus 

some results of his critical labours ; but Parisiis literatis nullam novit scientiam 

for its form, and for occasional diver- in lingua graeca de quo praesumit, et 

gences of opinion, he is not responsible. ideo omnia transfert falsa et corrumpit 

TR. scientiam Latinorum." Cp. Jourdain 

pp. i, 2. Recherches p. 67. 

Berlin, if" 

3 Berlin, 1881.8. 6 Busse op.cit.\>. 36 f. Space permits 

4 Susemihl however in the large criti- only a few typical instances to be selected 
cal edition (1872) p. XXXIII f. had already from his stock. 

pointed out inaccuracies and inconsisten- 7 p. 9. The best MS. gives Olimpiasem. 


dva Sw/xara in v (vin). 3. p 1 does less to obscure the readings of his 
original than a fatal inconsistency and fluctuation in the choice of 
renderings. The prepositions are changed or confused on almost every 
page. So likewise the particles : yap antem in m, yap n. 9. 18, ID-COS 

yap IV (Vll). 17. 13, Set yap V (vill). I. 2 2 , ) yap 4>-/#/r, III. 7. 5; 817 *?//# 

i. 2. i; oui/ <?//// i. 8. 6 3 , etc.: not to speak of the stock renderings 
Kai...Se ct...etiam, /cat rot <?/ quidem. Sometimes he omits particles 
(/x,eV, yap, 8e, oirrc); sometimes, ^.^. n. 5. 9 SiKai ws et iuste, he inserts 
them. They are most frequently inserted to avoid asyndeton, as in 
ii. 3. 7 <paropa ^vXeV^v fratruelem aut contribulem t etc. 4 He is care 
less of the order of words ; thus II. 4. 6 /cat yeveo-$ai e/< 87^0 oVrcov 
? eVa 6 1 / ambos fieri unnm ex duolnis existentibus ; iv (vn). 3. 8 
Kat / dominos (i. e. /cat Kvptov?) 5 . His carelessness leads him 
repeatedly to translate the adjectives a ptcrroKpaTtK^, oXtyap^tKry by the 
nouns <7 ristocratia , oligarch ia c . 

This being the ordinary style of his translation, when he comes to 
passages where his Greek original was defective, it is only occasionally 
that he transmits the defect faithfully : as in vm (v). 6. 3 h Ou (for 
evOa) in tlw, which he took for a proper name; in. n. 3 /c/at^s (for 
Kpirovcri, so M s ) Krics ; IT. 9. 30 <}>i\iTia (so M s ) amicalnlia ; v (vm). 
T 4 M s av T ipsoruin (he has read the compendium aurwv) ; 6 9 M s 
a avros (for avXos) /^/ ipsuni 1 . More frequently he tries to get some 
sort of sense by putting in a word or phrase suggested by the context, 
or by a parallel passage in the Politics. Take for instance vm (v). i. 3 : 
P 1 gives oViVovs e. TI oj/ras, with space for one letter ; M s has slurred 
over this defect of the archetype by reading en ; not so William ; from 
the immediately preceding e/< rov iarov<s OTLOVV ovras he derives inae- 
qiialcs in quocunque existentes. Similarly with natura for SuVa/xts in 
iv (vn). ii. 4 (from the adjoining <f>vo-iv), alia quidem esse eadeui for 
TO Trao-t [jLCTCivaL VI (iv). 4. 25 (from the following TaXXa /xev eu/ai 
TavTa) : see also in. 16 5 universale borrowed from c. 15 4 TO Ka06X.ov, 
IV (vn). i 4 quae circa prudcntiam se habent, neqne enim beatificant, 
iv (vn). T i i si ad rotum oportet adipisci positionem borrowed from 
5 3 rnv Olo-Lv el xpy TToiew KttT* &j^v ; etc. 8 Thus the defects and 
false readings of his original, which must have resembled M s though 
not so corrupt, are made worse by alterations and superficial remedies. 
In iv (vn). 14. 22 r had the same hiatus as M s has now, through 
the homoeoteleuton o-7rouS-a eu/, o-xoA-aeiv : William does what he can 

1 p. 12. 2 p. ii. at v (vm). 5. 17, where ox... is all that 

3 p. 30. 4 pp. 29, 30. stands in M 8 of aK 

5 pp. 14, 27. (i p. 9. 8 Busse pp. 15 20. 

7 pp. 9, 12, 23. Compare the lacuna 


to conceal this by translating eveKei/ rdy Kal T??? ei/M/nys gratia ordinis 
et pads, as if he had read renews. In vi (iv). 4. n M s gives rdV 
aSwarwv 77 instead of TCOV aSwcmov 77 ; so too P, for William renders 
<minus> quam to make sense. Similarly v (vin). 6. n M s has rjirovro 
for ^TTTOVTO ; William sequebantur ; which must be his attempt to make 
sense out of ^Vovro 1 . 

Another source of divergence between the codices and William s 
Latin must also be kept in view, viz. the freedom with which he some 
times translates. Thus in n. 9. 20 S^/wxywyetv atmws iJvayKa^ovro KCU ot 
/3ao-iAeis 7^v?r<? populum se ipsos (he read aimws) cogebant regcs, he may 
perhaps have simply exchanged the passive construction for the active. 
This is a not uncommon resource with him : see vn (vi). 7 5 Trpo- 
o-KtiaOaL apponcre, 8 i Si^p^o-^ou dividers etc. ; and for the converse 
n. 7 6 Set?7 ostendatur, 8 5 ypdfaw scribatiir, vm (v). 8. 9 TTU/KI- 
X^(/>eVai comprehendantur^ etc. 2 Though he hardly ever appears to 
omit words from P, it can be shown that he sometimes adds: r.^. 
i. 5. 8 ?7Tp rots ciprjfievois si quidem ct dictis <creditur>, n. 9. 
juteVai? Trept ot/covs (so M s for TreptotKoi;?) possideiitibus <praedia> 
domits, etc. 1 Yet additions may be due to glosses, like videro fugientem 
proelio, (?) dirdvevOe pd^rj<s votja-^ in the margin of P 1 , etc. 1 Lastly, 
how much caution is needed in handling this translation may be judged 
from a few characteristic blunders taken almost at random : i. 9. i 
ovre Troppo) eKetV^s neque longe <posita>\ n. 8. 13 o-u KaAoGs 8e ovS o 
Trepi rrjs Kpt crecos e^et vo/>to5, TO KptWtv d^iovv KT\ noil bcnc (tutcin nccjiic 
dc iudido habd lex iudificare dignificans, though here one might suppose 
he had o /cpiVeiv a^twi/ before him 5 : ll. II 14 eKacrrov aTroreXetrat TOJK 
aurwv -itiiuni qnodque perfidtur ab eisdem : c. 1 1 1 5 ru> TrAovreu/, atet 
TI TOV S rj/Jiov jotepo? eK7re//,7rovT5 CTTI ras TroXeis inditando semper al 
populi partcm emittentes super urbes, suggested perhaps by TTOLOVVLV 
povs in vii (vi). 5. 9 ? : in. 3 2 etVep oui/ B-rj^oKparovvTaL si quidem igitur 
in democratiam versae fuerant quaedam : 13 2 OLKOL habctur : iv (vii). 
1 6. 14 Trpos ^eo>i/ aTTO^epaTretai/ TOJV eiX^orcov T^F Trept r^? ycvecreo)? Tiprjv 
ad deorum reverentiam hits, quae sortitae sunt r//w qui de generatione 
honorem (as if rats etX^^ut at? were read) 8 . 

From this examination of the old translation Bussc concludes that 
it is a less trustworthy representative of the better recension (II 1 /. e. 
T P 1 M) than P 1 , the codex of Demetrios Chalkondylas. Its lost 
original was slightly better than the very corrupt Ambrosian manuscript 

1 pp. 21 23: r may have had ei- 4 p. 34. 5 pp. 24, 43. 
TTOJTO, but this is less probable. 6 p. 20. 7 p. 4 r . 

2 pp. 2426. 3 p. 32. 8 pp. 43, 20, 41. 


M s , but closely resembled it ; the common archetype of the two being 
itself very corrupt, with numerous omissions through homoeoteleuta 
and one or two glosses inserted in the text 1 . And it was from this 
Latin translation and not from another manuscript, he thinks, that 
the scribe of P 5 derived those readings wherein he departs from the 
second or worse family 2 . 

These conclusions however are by no means warranted 3 . The 
ignorance and uncritical spirit of William of Moerbeke render it all 
the more certain that in the majority of the right readings which are 
due solely to his translation he must have followed a codex con 
siderably better (as it was also older) than the archetype of P 1 or of 
M s . When all deductions have been made for variants arising from 
conjectures and mistranslations, the old translation presents the cor 
rect reading 18 times unsupported: 7 times in conjunction with P 5 
only : once in conjunction with P" only : 3 times with P 1 (or its cor 
rections) only; once with Aretinus only: 5 times in conjunction with 
more than one of the inferior manuscripts 4 . To these may be added 
some 12 other passages where the evidence, though good, is less con 
vincing 5 . Whereas the correct reading is due to P 1 alone u times, to 
P 1 in conjunction with inferior authorities (Ar., P 2 margin, P :! ) 5 times: 
and several of these are such changes as Demetrios or Aretinus could 

1 PP- 45 47- from v (vm). 8. i a passage ^yhere the 

; fn proof of this Bussc quotes (p. 48) second family IT- exhibits an hiatus 

_ P 1 M William P 5 (margin) 

7rapa5vofj,^ri subintrans inreiaovova a 

Trapavo/j-ia praevaricatio TrapaBacns 

rb [uxpov 5a7rdvr/^a parvae expensae at /MKpal dawdvat 

dvctipei consumunt 

There is nothing new in this observation. (nrovSa<rofj.^vwv, 35 /card, 1296 a 8 

Compare Susemihl s large critical edition (rets, b 38 TrK-fjde^ i32ob 9 TT)V lapavri- 

(1872) p. xni : "mirum autem est in eis vwv dpxw, T 5 T V S &VTTJS apxys, 1321 a 12 

verbis, quae in vulgatae recensionis co- oTrXm/c^, 1303 a 24 eyyus ov (or Zyyi- 

dicibus omissa hie liber (P 5 ) cum paucis fov?), 1311 a 6 %p?7 / u,arw^ : rP 5 i328a 5 

aliis et vetusta translatione servavit, irapa, 1336 a 6 eiadyeiv, 1340 a 16 5ri\oi> 

eum aliis illis interdum accuratius cum 6 rt 5e?, 132 ib 29x0, omitted, 1322 b ^6 

hac assentire aut alias eiusdem sensus Trpotrevdfoas (?), 1306!) 39 /cat omitted: 

voces quam illos hie illic offerre, ut PP 2 1259!) 28 5e; Pp 1 "1265 a 16 Trapct, 

propensus facile fias ad credendum hos 1272 b 39 /ca0 airo: PP* 1 (corrector) 

in eo locos non ex codice Graeco anti- 1278 b 22 Trap : PAr. I289b 38 TroX^- 

quiore, sed ex ipsa translatione Latina ftovs ; PP 5 Ar. 1336 a 5 5 : PR b 1303 b 

esse haustos." 31 rd: P Aldine P 2 (corrector) 1332 a 

3 With what follows compare Suse- 33 rc2 : P Ar. P 2 (corr. 3) 1335 a 26 <rc&- 
mihl Politico, tcrtinni cdita (1882) Pre- /xaros : Pp 2 1254 a 10 cnrXus (clTrXws 6 Xws 
face pp. vin xvin. M s P 1 , 6 Xws cet). 

4 P alone gives 1258 b 40 XaprjTidr) 5 Of the disputed cases 1260 b 20 oi/co- 
1260 a 4 dpxbvTWv /cat, 1260 b 41 els 6 VO/JLOI, 1262 b 32 TOVS 0uXa/cas, 1274 b 20 
TTJS, i266b 2 5 yd?), 1271 a 20 /cdV, 1276 a (a.TrorLvei.v or airorLvveivl), i28oa 29 ra- 
33 ZOvos ei>, 1 282 a 27 fj-eycara, 1285 a 7 \dvruv may be mentioned. 
auTOKpaTwp, 1 332 a 42 vi.a 5, 1336 a 34 


easily make for themselves 1 . In 4, or perhaps 5, places P 2 has alone 
preserved the right reading : it is difficult to find a single passage where 
it is due to M s or to P 3 alone 2 . From P 5 and from Aretinus unsup 
ported a greater number of such cases is derived ; but the uncertainty, 
whether we are dealing with a genuine reading of a manuscript or 
merely with conjecture, proportionately increases. The latter is more 
probable not only for P 5 , but for the few occasional good readings 
of the worst manuscripts 3 . 

Further it must be noticed that while M s r are often found alone 
supporting a variant against P 1 , M s P 1 are less frequently (the number 
of such cases being about -J) alone in agreement against P, and it is 
very seldom indeed that P 1 P alone support any reading against M s . 
What is the right inference to draw from this state of things? Evi 
dently that P and M s go back to one common archetype, and P 1 to 
another (from which also must be derived the traces of the better 
recension in P 4 P a ) : only the immediate ancestor of M s had been 
corrected by the latter, while this was not the case with P or the 
authorities from which it is derived 4 . The genuine readings of the 
family II 1 will be found to have been preserved sometimes in the one 
archetype (of M s P), sometimes in the other (of P 1 and of the correc 
tions in P 2 P ): and the relationship between the members of the family 
may be represented by the following tree. 

1 P 1 alone 1259 a r 3 ^awt/jo-ye/aw, the 
right order of 1278 a 36 f. (corr. 1 ), 1:>4 

corr. 1 (? /cd/ceu/os), I286b 17 
(perhaps T also), 1287 b 38 /3<x<ri- 
\iK6v, 1328 a 5 ctTrcryxecu, 1335 b 20 yevo- 
/j.vuv, 1 338 b 4 irporepov (corr. 1 ), 1340!) 30 
Traidtwv, 1299 b 24 eT^puv, I3i4a 35 r6 
iroieiv (?) : P 1 Ar. 1263!} 4 r6, I28ob 19 
el ?7<rcu> ; P 1 (corr.) Ar. 1255 a 37 Zityovov, 
1299 a 14 TToArrei cus ; P X P 2 (margin) P 3 
(later hand) 1284 a 37 KoXoljeiv. Of these 
{\aiovpyelwv, Trporepov, Traidiuv, TO Troteo , 

ti)<rav, %Kyovov are of slight weight. 

2 P 2 1253 a 25 /ecu omitted after 0i <rei, 
I27ob 38 enrol, 1325 a 29 auro TO (corr. 1 ), 
1339 a T 4 etireitv : perhaps 1338 b 33 

3 1267 b 33 rd L 9 , U b (corr.); 1274!) 
20 T L TTTCuVuxri L s ; 1275 b 39 TOVTO L s 
Aldine and M B (ist hand); 1331 a 24 
0eo?s P 4 Ar., 1295 a 28 rj L 8 C c Ar., 
I3i7a 12 ri s R b Ar. 1302 b 39 rd troabv 
R b . 

4 For proof of this see (beside the criti- 


Few of the readings common to M s P 1 or of those common to T M s 
have much to recommend them. Yet this is far from proving P 1 to be 
our best authority. Against such a view may be urged (i) the number 
of mistakes with which, no less than P or M s , it abounds : (2) the futile 
attempts at correction which it sometimes exhibits, e.g. in. 13. 15 ravra? yap 
SeT SicoKeu for avrai yap Srj SOKOVCTL SiwKai/ (&OKOVCTL having been omitted 
in the archetype of II 1 ) : (3) the fact that, as just shown, P, solely or with 
inferior manuscripts, furnishes the true reading at least 34 (perhaps 46) 
times whereas P 1 , alone or with inferior manuscripts, does the same 
only 1 6 times. These considerations are not to be set aside by an 
isolated passage like in. 9. 8, where P 1 Sta/coVovo-t is a trifle nearer right 
than M s Sia/covovo-i Will, nii/iistrant 1 . 

All existing manuscripts of the Politics, when compared even with 
those of the Ethics, are late and bad. Still there are degrees of bad 
ness : and if to follow P M s , other things being equal, in preference to 
P sometimes leads an editor away from the true reading of IT, he 
would yet oftencr go astray if he followed P 1 against P M s . The 
relationship between the two families is itself obscure. In some re 
spects II 3 is the better of the two, particularly where it preserves words 
omitted in II 1 : in such cases it is seldom n 2 that has a gloss inserted, 
nearly always it is n 1 that is mutilated 2 . Yet as a general rule II 1 should 
be followed in preference to n 3 . 

Coming now to Basse s view about P 5 , we must admit that this 
manuscript presents most remarkable variants. Take v (vin). 2 5 ff . 
(1337!) 17 ff.): 

P 1 M s William P 5 

ad perfectionem Trpos TO re/Xetoi/ 

dictis p??$eio-ais 

6 ei/e/cev gratia X a / u (Bekk.) 

TO yap avrov ipsius quidem enirn avrov yap (Bekk.) 
<iAxoi> amicorum TOOK 

C. 3 T rrjv 8e fJLOvcrLKrjv r)^ (le musica autem Trcpl 8e 

3 TeXos fmaliter TcXcvTalov 

on Set TTOLovvras quod facientes oportetrt 7roio{WasSer(Bekk.) 3 
In some of these instances the discrepancy has nothing to do with 

cal notes) Susemihl s Third edition (1882) some parts of the treatise, K h O b and 

Preface pp. x, xi, where also the diagram IJ M 1 in others. 

is given, p. xvi. * Other instances of close agreement 

* Quoted by Busse p. 45. with the old translation, in 1327 a 34, 

2 The manuscripts of the Nicomachcan 1329 a 17, 18, 1334 a 37, 1336 a 34, b 18, 

Ethics show an equally perplexing dis- 1320 a 10, 1307^ 32 f. Susemihl op. c. 

crepancy between K b M b and L b O b in v ui. 


the old translation : and this is still more plain from the following 
variants of P 5 : 1330 a 32 X py for SeZ c. c. 1 ; 1333 b 2 Se K al ra xi>W^ 
for Kat Ta xPW L f^ a $* (n 1 omit Se); 1335 k 2 3 TatSoTrou as for TCKI/O- 
Troaas; 1336 b 5 yap TOU for TOU yap, 1339 a 1 6 x a p tl/ f r weKa, 
1340 a 8 SrjXov for <avepoV; 9 dAAwj/ for eVe pwi ; 1342 a 6 aWo-ai? for 

Wo-ats; 1309 a 1 8 ov for /x^ . But at the same time this corrupt care 
lessly written book has some readings agreeing with P 1 and M s against 
the old translation, and others which no Latin version would ever 
have suggested. Thus 1338 b 27 AeiTro/xeVots M s P s dcficicntcs William, 
1318 b 31 Ti/ATy/xdVcoi Tas /xei^ou? aVo omitted by M s P translated by 
Will; 1326 b 4 /xev -rots M s P 1 5 Aid., Tots ftei/ IP ; 1332 b I /zeTa- 
/2a AAeii/ M s P 1 - 5 /xeTa/5aAetv II 2 ; 1334 b 2 TC untranslated by Will., 
Ta P 1 5 ; 1335 a 1 6 TO c. c. TOVS M s P 5 ; 1337 a 18 fttXnov M s P 5 Ar., 
/3e ATto-Tov c. c. optiinus Will.; 1319 b 24 Kat Ta P 1 5 and in the margin 
of P 4 , KaTa c. c. in Will.; 27 at -rrpoVepat 11 P and the corrector of P 1 , 
at TrpoVepov II 2 ; 1322 a 22 TOIS etp^eVots M s and P 1 (ist hand), T/ys 
eip?;/xeV^s c. C. dicto Will.; 1306 a 22 eyxetpiVoj/xei/ ceteri, ey^Lp-qa-wcnv 
M s , eyxetpT/ o-oucrti/ P nianus inicccriiit Will.; 1313 b 2 <^)poj/^/xa TC P 1 5 
R b , <^)pov7;^,aTa TC c. c. sapicntiac Will.; 1316 a 32 TWV c. c. TOU P 1 Ar., 
in P M s a hiatus. Take even the suspected passage 1334 a 28, 29 

Set SiKatOfruj T/s Kat TroAA^s o~oj^>poo"i;vr/s TOUS dpto~Ta SoKouvTas vrpaTTeti^ 
Kat TrdvTW rwv /xaKapi^o/xe i OJi/ aTroAavovTas C. C., indigent iustitia ct uiulta 
teniperantia qui optiine videntur agere et omnibus beat is frni Will. Any 
one correcting the text from the Latin version would surely have 

written aTroXaveiv ; but P has Seoi Tat ot aptcrra SoKowi^Tes O.TTO- 

AavovTes. Or again, 1311 b 7 Sia TO eis TO o~o3jaa aicr^i at (atcrp(^J ai 
M s P 1 aivxyvea-Oai Tl 2 ); proptcrca quod aliqui monarcJianiin in corpus 
verecundiam fecerunt would have suggested atcr^vat, not ala-^v^iv which 
is what we find in P 5 . So again had the scribe wished to emend the 
corrupt o-n-XiTrjv of 1321 a 12, William s aruiativain would have sug 
gested oVAtTiKT/v or oVAmv, not oVAmKoV which is the reading of P\ 
Far more probable is it that here traces of the archetype still remain. 
Similarly in 1320 b 3 the right reading a<te/x,eVovs seems to have come 
down in P 5 as well as in P 1 : it is at least unlikely that William s 
respuentes suggested it. Even in vin (v) 8. 2, the passage which Busse 
thinks conclusive, but for the reminiscence of a phrase in Plato it is 
by no means clear that 7rapaSvop,eVr; should supersede w 

1 Consensus codicum. some cases even, e.g. 1336 b 18, 1337 b 

2 Bekker, who took P 2 of the second i6f., 34 f., where M 8 ? 1 have a better 
or worse family as the foundation of his reading. See p. 76. 

text, often adopted readings from P 5 : in 


Dislocations and double recensions. 

The text of the Politics, when put into the more coherent shape 
which to the German editor most nearly reproduces Aristotle s intention 1 , 
is seen to depart from the order of the manuscripts not merely in the two 
great instances of the arrangement of the books 2 , but also in a large 
number of other cases. It will be useful here to review, at greater 
length than can be done in the critical footnotes, the difficulties for 
which transposition seems to be suggested as a natural remedy, especially 
as the fullest account of these suggestions has often to be sought in 
monographs or magazine articles not always readily accessible. 

(i) Bk. i. ii 5, 6. Montecatino, p. 422 of his Commentary on 
Bk. i., was the first to enquire what is the connexion between 6, eurt 8e 
Te^j/tKcorarat /xev TOUV epyacrioov OTTOV eXa^tcrrov TU^S, /2avavcroTaTai 8 ev 
at? TU (rayxaTO, X(o/5a>VTat /xaXicrra, oouA-iKooTarai 8 OTTOV TOU crco/xaros TrAeT- 
crrat ^p^o-a?, ayeiWcrraTat 8e OTTOV e\d\io-TOV TrpocrSet aperf/s, and the 
context. Piccart, p. 140, proposed to remove it to follow TO) o-wpxri 
/xoVw xp?7o-i)ucov 0- 2 7)- As Schneider saw, this will not do; for the third or 
mixed sort of xP r )f JLarLa " riK ^ could not be excluded from the epyao-iai of 
6. Now the last words of 5, immediately before eto-i 8e TexviKommH 
KT\, are, trepl e/cacrrov 8e TOVTWV KaOoXov /x,ev eip^rat Kal vvv, TO Se Kara 
(Jitpos aKpifioXoytiorOai ^pv^cri/xoi/ /xev ?rpos ras epyacrias, cfropTLKOv Se TO 
e^SiaTpt/?etj/. This reads like the final remark of Aristotle on the sepa 
rate branches of ^p^/xaTio-TtKT/, considered not in regard to theory but to 
practice (TCI ?rpos TTJV xPW lv i J ) : no new remarks upon them ought to 
be added. If so, 6, which consists of such remarks, would be in place 
if it preceded vrept IKOLO-TOV B KT\ : or, which is the same thing, if the 
sentence Trepl e/cao-Tov 8e...To ei Sia,Tpi / /3av be transposed to follow a 
The argument too runs on better to the next sentence eVet 8 
eVtois yeypa/x//.Va KT\, 7. "I have here said what was necessary in a 
"general way on each of these various branches; to go accurately into 
"details would no doubt be useful for the various pursuits themselves, 
" but it would be a tedious subject to dwell upon. The reader is 
referred for particulars to the separate works which have been written 
" upon them 3 ." 

1 As may be done by passing over the thus < > . 

parts printed in Clarendon type and read- - See above p. 16 n 4. 

ing the duplicates of the same passages in 3 Susemihl Quaestiones Criticac i p. 9 

their transposed place; where they stand (Greifswald 1867. 4). 
in ordinary type between thick brackets 


(2) Bk. i. 13 8. q. v. "It is strange," says M. Thurot 1 , "that 
" after having spoken of the deliberative part of the soul, Aristotle does 
" not say one word of the dperal Siayo^riKcu which properly belong to it, 
"while speaking three times, 11. 15, 17, 20, of iJ0ifoj dptT-rj in the same 
" sense. Further, it is singular that in order to prove that he who com- 
" mands ought to have ?J0t/o} apervj in perfection, he says that the work 
" belongs to him who directs it and that reason (Xoyos) is a directing 
" faculty : this reflexion evidently applies to the dper>) Siaz/o^Tt/o} of TO 
"Xo yov e xov, elsewhere called <poV?7o-is, in. 4. 17, and not to the rjOiK-r] 

TJ of the aXoyoi/." He proposes therefore to transpose 11. 14 17, 
TOLVW . . .epyov to follow e7rt/:?aXXet auTots : to omit yOiKr) in line 20, 
and change rjOiK-rjv to Siavor/TiKiJv in 1. 17. (The transposition becomes 
less needed and less satisfactory if yOtKrjv be retained.) Now there is 
no doubt that, on the stricter Aristotelian theory, ^01/170-15 inseparably 
involves rjOiKrj apery, Nic. Eth. VI. 13 2, 3, 6 (cp. ib. 12 6, en TO 
epyoi/ oVoTeXetTai Kara Trjv (frpovrjo-Lv Kal TTJV t}OiK r i]v dptrtjv) ; SO 1. 20 
yOuo) may stand. The dianoetic virtue, in its perfection, seems to 
reside solely in the master who commands. Cp. 7, just above the 
present passage, d SouXos 6 Xws OVK e^ei TO /3ovXeuTi/<dV, and Pol. in. 4. 
17, 1 8, r] Se (frpovycrts ap^ovTOs iSios apeT>) fj^ovfj. ras yp aXXas COIKCI/ avay- 
Karov eTvat Kotvas Kal TWV ap^o/xevwv Kat TCOI/ ap^ovToJi/, ap^o/xei/ov 8e ye OUK 
eWtv apeTy) (frpovrjvis, aXXa So ^a aX^0^s with the notes. 

(3) 11.4. 4, eWe Se /xaXXov.. ./xvy j/ewTept^etv. "It is singular that 
"Aristotle supposes here what he has not yet proved and is going to 
" prove later on, namely, that communism relaxes the bond of family 
"affections. Again in c. 5 24, 1264 b i, he supposes without saying 
" so, that community of wives and children will make the labourers 
"more obedient" (Thurot) 2 . He therefore suggests that n. 4. 4 should 
follow Koii/awW in ii. 5. 24. A better place would seem to be in 4 9, 
1262 b 24, after Aristotle has proved that vSapiJs ^tXt a must result from 
the Platonic institutions in the absence of the ordinary motives to 
mutual kindness. The argument of 59 goes to show 

avdyKT) TOVVO.VTLOV (Sv Trpocr^Kei TOWS 6p6<jj$ Kei/x.eVoL>? VOJJLOVS 
yivcaOai ; the application to the agricultural class would come in appo 
sitely to point this reversal of the effect intended :! . 

(4) II. 6 3 sub Jill. KOL Trept TT^S TratSetas, Trotai/ rcva Set yiVecr^at rwv 
<uXa/juv. Aristotle would hardly consider a discussion Trept TratSetas to 
be extraneous to the main political subject of the Republic. Moreover 

1 Etudes sur Aristote 18, 19. Comp. 2 Op. cit. 16, -27. 

also Susemihl Quaest. Crit. vi. 9 n. 3 Susemihl Quaest. Grit, \ p. 13. 


in line 37 he exchanges the construction with Trept for a new one OUTOU 
SetV. . .777rAr/pto/<e. The clause KCU Trept TratSeta?. . .(frvXaKwv should come 
amongst the subjects (irepl oXiyuv Tra/xTrav) on which Socrates in the 
Republic has touched, and therefore in i after KT?jo-ea)s 1364 b 30 . 

It is possible, however, while admitting that the transposition would 
give a better position to these words, to defend their present place. 
Aristotle is evidently criticizing in an unsympathetic spirit. He has 
reduced the points touched upon to a minimum (Trept oXtywv Tra/xTrai/). 
Afterwards, when he complains of the extraneous topics which take up 
the bulk of the treatise (criticism on poetry and art, psychology, meta 
physics, ethics), he has grudgingly to allow that some of these long 
digressions do serve the purpose (or at least are introduced under the 
colour) of elaborating the training of the guardians. 

(5) ^ 7 I? ^ L f^ v lOWOTwv oi oe (^)iXocro0ojv KO.I TroA-tTtKcov. Gipha- 
nius (Van Giffen) 2 comparing c. 12 i, eVtot f^lv OVK eKowwya-av Trpa- 
e(jOj/ TroXiTLKwv ovS wi Ttvoji/ow, aAAa oieTeXetrav tStcoTevovTes ToV fiiov... 
eVtot Se vofjioOtTai yt.yovo.cnv.. .TroXtrev^evres avroi, proposed to omit 
$ 1X00-0$ wv Kat. Spengel 3 simply transposed these words before iStomoy. 

(6) n. 7 10 13 -.-. 18 20. 

The third objection to Phaleas scheme, 8 13, emphasizes the 
necessity for equality of education as well as of possessions. Like the 
preceding criticisms, 5 7, it deals with the internal arrangements of 
the state. In 14 17 there is a transition to its external relations, 
which Phaleas ought not to have overlooked, as he did. It is not 
likely then that in 18 20 (with which we must take 21) Aristotle 
would return to internal matters and repeat his previous objection in 
other words. Yet this is what he has done if the common order be 
retained. Let the two passages be read side by side, and it will be 
seen that there is no new thought in the latter, but only a reiteration 
of the former in different language. 

eTret o-Tacrid^ovo-LV ov povov eWt /xei/ ovv TL TCOI/ 

oia Tf]v avKTOTTyra T/^S KT>y<Teco?, TO ras oi;o~tas to"a? etvat rols 

aAAa. Kat Sia, rrfV TOJV Ti/x,aJv, TOV- TroXtrats Trpos TO /tXTy o Tao ia^eiv 

VOLVTLOV Se Trept eKaTepov (ot /x.ev yap Trpos dXX-tjXovs, ov fJLrjv /xeya ovStv 

vroXXoi Sia TO TreptTa? KTT/O-CIS avio~ov, ws etvretv. Kat yap av 01 

1 Compare Victorius Comm. p. 106 bus ad materiam eorum librorum indican- 

(ed. of 1 5 76): adiungit autem in extreme dam, non cum inferioribus ut quidam 

disputasse ctiam illic Socratem de disci- falso putarunt. 

plina quam putaret convenire custodibus 2 In his commentary p. 210. 

illius rei publicae : hoc enim coniungi 3 Arist. Stndicn ill. p. 14 (66). 
debet cum iis quae nunc repetit facienti- 



ot Se x a / t/VTS Tpt TCOV Ti/xcoV, 
tdv tcrar o$ev Kat 

v 5 / TJfj.ev KCLKOS ^5^ /ecu eV$Aos), 
ov /xoVov $ ot aV$pto7roi Sta Ta avay- 
Kata aSiKovcriJ , eoV (XKOS eTi/at vo/xt^et 

T7/J/ tO-o TT/Ta TT/S OVCTtaS, (OO-T6 /XT/ 

XtoTroSvTerv Sta TO ptyovv T/ TretVT/v, 
aAAa Kat OTTCOS x at/ P wcrt Ka ^ / xr ) 
7ri^v/xtoo-iv eav yap /xet^co ex 00 " 
o~tv eTrt^vyat av TCOI/ arayKat tov, Sta 
TT/V TavTT/s taTpetav aSiKr/o ovo ti , 
ov TOIWV Sta TavTT/v /Jiovov, aAAa 
Kat avev eTrt^v/xttov tVa ^aLp(j)cn Tats 
a^ev AVTTCOV T/Sovats. Tt ovv aKos TCOV 
Tpttov TOV TCOV ; TO?S /xei/ ovcrt a j3pa- 
veta Kat epyacrta, Tots oe o~cocppoo"vi / T/" 
rpirov 8 , et Ttves Svratj/TO St avrtoj/ 
vaipciv, OVK ar eTri^T/Totev et /XT/ vrapa 
aKos, at yap aAAat aV- 
Se ovTat. eTret aStKovo"t ye 
Ta Sia Tas vTrepySoAas, aAA 
ov Sta Ta aVayKata, otov Tvpavvovcrtv 
ov"x tVa /XT/ ptycocrtv (Sto Kat at Tt/xat 
/xeyaAat, aV aTTOKTeti T/ Tts ov KAe TTTT/v 
aAAa Tvpavvov) (o o~Te Trpos Tas /xtK- 
pas aStKt as (3or)6r]TiKos (JLOVOV o rpo- 
TTOS TT/S X aAe ov TroAtTetas. 7 IO 

ayavaKToiej/ [ar] cos OVK to-cov 
tx^toi, Sto Kat qWVovTai 
eTrtTt^e/xevot Kat crrao-ia^oJ Tes ert 8 

7/ TTOVT/pta TO)!/ aF^pOJTTCOV a7rXT/O~TOV, 

Kat TO Trpcorov /xev tKarov Stco/SoXta 
/xoj/ov, orav 8 T/T/ TOVT ^ 7ra.Tpi.ov, 
act oeoi rat TOU TrXetoro?, e cos 15 
eX^axrtv. aetpo? 

TT/i/ avaTrAT/pcocriv ot TroAAot 


Tas ovcrt as ti/xaAt ^etv, TO TOVS /xev 
">/ ^)vcret TotovTOVS vrapa- 
itv cocTTe /XT/ /?ovAeo-^at TrAeov- 

Svvacr^at TOVTO 8 eo-TtV, txv T/TTOVS 
TC cocrt Kat /xr/ aStKcoi/rat. 7 1 8 

It seems advisable therefore to remove 18 21 to precede 14 
CTI, to treat as parallel versions 10 13, 18 20 cited above, and 
to take 21 as coming directly after them but before I4 1 . 

(7) ii. ii 12. In 9 Aristotle says that eligibility to office on 
the ground of wealth and on the ground of merit are traits of oligarchy 
and aristocracy respectively : hence the Carthaginian constitution, where 
wealth and ability combined are qualifications for the highest offices, 
must be a third and distinct scheme. This, he adds, 10, is a fault in 
the legislator, who ought to have made provision that ability should not 
be associated with poverty even in citizens in a private station: o poV 

O7TCOS Ot /3eA.TlCTTOt Svi/COl/Tttt <T^O\d^LV Kttt /XT/SeV do ^TJIJiOVeiV, /XT/ fJLOVOV 


1 Susemihl in Jahrb.fiir Philol. xcvi. 1866. p. 330. 


apxovTts dXXd /xr?S iStwretWre?. Now here, as far as the sense goes, the 
clause in 12 belongs : ySe /Yrtov 8 , et KO,! TrpoetTo rrjv pfaopiav TO>V cvrteiKwi/ 
o vopoOir^, aXXa ap^oWeov ye eVt/x-eXeurtfat r^? o^oX???. " If he was 
"forced to neglect the last-mentioned task, at least he might have made 
"provision for poor men in office." Then would follow quite naturally 
the criticism of 10 : "at all events he should not have allowed these 
"high offices to be virtually put up for sale 1 ." 

(8) III. 7 3, 4 orav 8e TO 7rX?7$os Trpos TO KOLVOV 
o~t /A</>epoi , KaXemu TO Kotvov ovop.a. Tracrwi^ TGJJ/ TroXtTeiojj/, TroXtTCta. 
j3a.LVi 8 euXoyco?. eva /xev yap Sta^epeiv KaT* dpeTrjv rj TrAetovs eVSe^eTat, 
TrAetous 8 ryS?; ^aXeTroi/ rjKpifiwa-QaL Trpos Tracrav dpertjv, aXXa //.aXio-ra TT]I/ 
7ro\jJ.LKrjv avrrj yap tv TrXrjOei ytVeTat* SioVep KaTct TavT^v TV}I/ TroXtTetai/ 
Kupiamrroj/ TO TrpOTroXe/xovi/ Kat fJieT^ovcnv avrr/^ ot Ke/<T^/x,eVot Ta 6VXa. 
Spengel 2 first called attention to the difficulty of o-v/x^atvct 8 cuAo- 
ycos, when as Aristotle goes on to explain (17877 ^aXeTroV) it is hard 
for a large number of citizens to attain a high standard of excellence. 
Thurot 3 supposed a lacuna to precede o-iyx/3cuVi, containing a reason 
for the name IToXtTeta, something like this : <8ta TO TOT)S Tr-oXm/coi)? 

v, aXXa /x?J TOI;S aVXco? a pto-Toi;s>. The parallel passage in in. 17. 4 
7r\-fjOo<s iv w Tre^vKer eyytVecr^at TrXrjOos TroXe/xtKoV may have 
suggested to Zeller the insertion of TroXe/ziKoV before TrXrjOos in 3. In 
any case he is right so far as this, that the remark to which 
cvAoyws refers must emphasize the warlike character of HoAtTcta 4 . 
Schmidt lastly found such a remark, and the lost subject of the verb 
crvfJ,(3a,Lvei, in the last clause of 4, /cat //eTe^ovo-ti/ avrrjs ot KCKT^/xe^ot ra 
on-Aa, which he would transpose to come after TroAtrcta. 

(9) m - II 20 aXXa yap... 21 Keto-$at TOUS vo /xoug. Schneider 
bracketed the clause aXXa yap . . . JStVou? as superfluous and disturbing to 
the context. If retained in the present order there appears to be a 
double recension aXXa yap...d8t / Kous TrX^v TovTo...T/o/*ous 5 . But it seems 
better, with Congreve, to reverse the order of the two sentences. 

(10) in. 13 6 et Se ToV api^aoj/,..^ avrw. Thurot 6 sums up his 
elaborate examination of the context as follows. Aristotle has proposed, 
5, to investigate who ought to have power in a state where all kinds 
of superiority are represented wealth, nobility, virtue, numbers. The 
discussion continues as follows : (i) If the virtuous are few in number 
we must enquire whether there are enough of them to govern the state 

1 Susemihl Jahrb. /. Ph. xcvi. 1866. 4 Susemihl Philol. xxix. 1870. 106 

P- 9 33 /V 7 ,. , " l6 Quaest. Crit. in. p. 15, iv. p. 12. 

I Ueber die Politik p. 23 . 24. B Susemihl Quacst. Crit. m. p. 16. 

" ^/^ sur Aristote p. 42, 43. 6 Etudes sur Aristote 4751. 


or to constitute a state by themselves, 6. (ii) No superiority gives 
exclusive right to power, 7 10. (iii) The best laws are adapted to 
the interest of the whole state and the body of citizens, n, 12. 
(iv) Individuals, one or more, of pre-eminent virtue cannot be reduced 
to a level of equality, 13, 14 (then follows a digression on ostracism). 
Now (i) has no direct bearing on the question proposed : the right of 
virtuous men to command must be proved before any enquiry as to what 
ought to be done when the virtuous are few in number : (ii) is the 
negative solution and (iii) has the germs of a positive solution, which 
we may suppose more fully developed in a part now lost. A discussion 
of a particular case, analogous to that in (i), is presented in (iv). The 
conclusion is that the proper place for (i) will be after (iii), i.e. some 
where between aper^V ( 12, end) and ei 8e n s ecrriv, the beginning of 
13. For 7 12 are certainly just as much in place immediately after 
the question proposed in 5, which they answer from the negative side. 
And although in itself 6 might very well follow 5, it must excite 
considerable suspicion to find that the important question started in 6 
is never fully answered at all and not even noticed until 13 . 

(11) III. 13. 22. The sentence coo-re Sia TOVTO...TOVTO opcocrii/, if 
genuine, interrupts the thread of the remarks begun in 20 and con 
tinued to SiopQovv in 23, to the effect that the problem, what to do 
with unduly eminent citizens, is one which is equally urgent in all 
constitutions. The words cited coo-re Sia TOVTO . . . TOVTO opcoo-iv, however, 
do not bear upon the general problem, but on the particular case of 
monarchs. Hence, as Thurot 2 saw, they would be more in place in 23 
after SiopOovv, at the end of the general reflexions. Bernays 3 however 
found them a place at the end of 20 above, after e xa rpoVoz/. 

(12) in. cc. 15, 1 6. On the question of absolute sovereignty, 
TrorepdV Trore eVo, cri;/x</)epet Kvpiov eTvat TTOLVTMV i} ov criyxc/jepei, a succession 
of aTropiat and a general investigation are promised in 15 3. What 
follows in the order of the manuscripts may be briefly summarized as 
follows 4 : (a) Is the rule of the best man more advantageous than the 
rule of the best laws? 36. (/5) Assuming that in certain directions 
the laws are insufficient, should the decision rest with the one best man 
or with a number of the more competent citizens, in the extreme case 
the whole body of a qualified community? 7 10. Then comes a 
historical or antiquarian appendix to this a/ropta, contained in n, 12. 
(y) How are the standing difficulties of hereditary succession, 13, 14, 

1 Susemihl in Philol. xxix. 1870 pp. 3 In his Translation^. 211. 
1134. 4 For a fuller account see the Analy- 

2 Etudes sur Aristote 51 53. sis p. 112 f. 



and (8) a body-guard, 14, 15, to be dealt with? Aristotle appends 
to this last enquiry a sort of digression, 16, showing what would be 
the decision in the case of the constitutional monarch. But, as he 
explains, resuming his argument with c. 16, it is not the constitutional 
monarch, but the absolute sovereign about whom the question is now 
being raised ( i, 2, down to the words Kara rrjv eavroi) /SovXya-Lv 6 
/3ao-tXeus). Here it seems absolutely necessary to assume a lacuna. 
For what immediately follows, 2 SoK-et 8e TLO-IV,.. 4 Travrvw, relates to 
a different aVopta altogether : (c) Is not the rule of one an unnatural 
anomaly where the citizens are all on the same footing (e o/xoiW 
77 Tro Xtg)? Should not power rather pass from hand to hand (oVa 

Here the limit of oVopiai distinctly discernible is reached : in the 
remainder of c. 16, 4 13, dXXd /Jv...d/xoia)s, no new question is 
started, but remarks are jotted down which bear more or less directly 
on those formulated in the preceding chapter. Thus all from 4 aXXa 
furjv as far as Kara TO 005 in 9 must belong to the first aVopia (a) : 
Is the rule of the best man to be preferred to that of the laws ? Not 
that it could anywhere find a place as a whole in 15 3 6; but the 
earlier part (<?) a XXa p,>}j/... 5 TWV Kei//.eVa>v could suitably be transferred 
to the end of 15 5 to follow KaXXiov and precede cm ^lv TOIWV ; the 
remainder (/;) 16 5 o j-i^v ovv rov vo/xov... 9 Kara TO c0os might be 
inserted a little higher up in 15 5 between Trdo-av and a AX 10-005. 
Again, the next piece of c. 16, (t) 9, 10 from dXXd p}r ou Se paStov 
as far as o-v/x^paS/xoj/e?, clearly has for its subject that comparison of 
the one best man with a number of qualified citizens which is intro 
duced in (/?): and this might go in 15 10 after o ets and before d 877. 
To this same aVopta further belongs the remainder of c. 16, from 
10 eiVi Se Kttt vvv to the end Setr o /Wws; when placed side by side 
with c. 15 7 10 KOU yap...o e ets, it is seen to be another recension 
of that passage. 

KCU yap vvv o-wtovre5 SiKa^ouo-t etat 8e Kai vvv vrept evttov at d 

Kal ftovXtvovTai Ko.1 Kpuvovcriv, avrat KvpiaL KptVe^, wo-Trep o 8tKao-T7;5, Trept 

8 eicTLV at Kpto-ei5 7rao"at Trept Ttov a)v o vo /xos a8vi/aTeT Stopt^et^, eTrct 

Ka0 Kao"TOV. Ka$ eVa /xev ovv CTV/JL- Trepi wv ye 8uvaTO5, oi;8et5 d/j.cfacr firf- 

ocrTto-oui/ to-(05 xetpcov Tet Trept TOUTOJV 0)5 OVK av dpicrTa 6 

7) 7roXt5 CK 7roXA.d)F, coo"7rep i op.05 ap^ete Kat Kptvetev. a XA. erret 

Kat dirXrjs. 8ta ToGro Kat KptVet a- vo /xots Ta 8e aSuvaTa, TOVT eortj/ a 
//etvov 0^X05 TroXXa ^ et5 ocrrtaovT. Trotet StaTropetv Kat ,r)Tiv 



/xaXXov a 8ta ($opov TO TroXv, 
vSa>p TO TrXeTov, OVTCO /cat TO 

TOV aptcTTOV i 0/x.ov ap^etv atpeTcoTepov 
rj TOV uYSpa TOV apicrrov. Trept cov 

dXtycov a8ta($opcoTepov yap (BovXevovrai, 

TOV yap eVds VTT* opy^s KparrjOevros 
7} Ttvos erepov TrdOovs TOLOVTOV dray- 
Katov Sit(j>0dp6ai rrjv KpiVtv, tKet 8 
epyov dfjia. TravTas opyicrOtji aL Kal 
dfJMprelv. eo-Tto Se TO vrAr^os ot 
(\tvOepoi, pi?7ei/ Trapa, TOV VO/AOV 
TrpaTTOVTe?, aXA. ?} Trept cuv eKXetVetv 
ai/ayKaTov avToV. et Se 8?^ ytt7^ TOVTO 
paStov cv TroXXoT?, aXX et TrXeto^s Swcrtv 
eTcv dyaOol /cat aVSpes Kal TroXtTat, 

a SwaVcov ecrriv. ov TOIVVV TOVTO y 
avTtXe yovcriv, cos OVK avayKatov av- 
$po)7roi/ eti/at TOV KptvowTa Trept TCOV 
TOIOI;TCOV, a/\X OTI otn^ eva 
aXXa TroAAov?. Kpu/et yctp 
ap^tov 7re7raiSeiyxei/os 1^710 TOU 
/caXto<?, CLTOTTOV T tcrtog uv eTrat So ^etev 
ct /^e XTtov e^ot Tts Suotv o/x/xatrt KCU, 
KptVcoi , /cat TrpaTTtov 
TroXXot TroX- 

8ucrt Troal /cat 

TTOTepov d ets a8ta^)^opcoTepos ap^cov, Xots, eTret Kat I ^v o(f>0o.\[jiov<; TroX- 
17 p:aXXov ot TrXetovs p,ev TOV apt^/xov Xovs ot /xovap^ot Troiorcrtv O.UTOJV Kat 

dyaOoi Se TravTes ; r) S^Xov cos ot 
TrXet ovs ; a XX ot ju,ev O"Tao"tao~oto"tv 
d 8e els acTTacriao-Tos. aXXa Trpos 
TOVT avTt^eTeov t o-ojs ort o-TrovSatoi 
TT^V i/ar>(?/v, wo-Trep KaKetvos d et?. 15 
y IO. 

Kat Trooas. TOUS yap 
TrJ dp^rj Kat arVou ^>tXovs 
avi/ap^ov?. p.7^ <^)tXot p:ev ovv 
ov Trot^ o-ovcrt KaTa T^V TOU p:ovap^ov 
Trpoat pccrtV et 8e (/>t Xot KaKen/ov Kat 
T^S dpfflS, o ye </>t Xos to-os Kat o/xotog, 
toW et TOVTOVS ot eTat Setv ap^etv, 
TOVS to-ovs Kat d/xotovs a p^etv ot eTai 
Setv d/xotcos. 16 10 13. 

Such would be the best restoration of the primitive order of these 
two chapters, if the order of thought and the connexion were solely to 
be followed. Yet undoubtedly the less complicated and artificial 
assumption is that of two independent versions combined by an over- 
careful or unintelligent compiler. Such a view has been acutely advo 
cated by Mr J. Cook Wilson 1 . "It may be that the two chapters belong 
" almost wholly to two parallel versions and that instead of being 
" combined they should be still further resolved." Thus 

(i) 15 2, 3 TO /x,ev ovv...evovo-as 16 I ?rept 8e TOV 
(ii) 15 3 6 ap^>j...7ravTas corresponds in subject to 

16 3 9 TOV a pa vo //,ov...KaTa TO e#os + IO, 1 1 eto-t Se Kat 

(iii) 15 7 10 Kat yap...o c ets corresponds in subject to 

1 6 II 13 a XX oVi...Setv O/AOUDS and to 9, 10 a XXa /x?jv 

Journal of Philology n. 1881. pp. 82, 83. 


ov&e paSiov . . . <TVfjL<f>paiSfjLovcs. " Of these passages the third 
[16 9, 10] disturbs the context and looks like a parallel 
version of the second." 

To this arrangement of the contents of the two chapters it may be 
objected 1 (i) that the second version is so fragmentary as to present no 
statement of the problems under discussion and no intimation when we 
pass from one of them to the other. (2) The arrangement destroys 
what appears to be one connected sentence beginning 15 16 ra^a /xei/ 
ovv and continued in 16 i Trepi Se rov /3acriXecog. The sense runs on 
without a break from 15 14 e^ei S oVopiW to 16 2 d /3ao-iXeu$. 
(3) The resolution into parallel versions is not complete ; it must be 
supplemented by transposition: for it has to be admitted that 16 4, 5 
a XXa fjirjv o<ra...Tuv /cet/xeVw^ "interrupts the argument of the context: 
"it belongs to the same part of the subject as [ 10, n] 1287 b 16 23 
" and may be read after rv aSwdVcov eortV 1287 b 23" (in n). 

Spengel 2 proposed a simpler remedy for the confusion of cc. 15, 16 : 
viz. to transpose 16 49 aXXa /x^i/ oo-a ye... Kara TO e$os to follow 
KaXXiov, at the end of 15 5. The passage following Kara TO Wos in 
1 6 9 also begins with aXXa p-qv, and there is an actual case, viz. the 
MS. A c , where the recurrence of a word (o-uXXoyio-juo s in Rhet. i. 2 
1357 a 17 and b 6) led to the omission of the intervening passage and 
its insertion in the margin. The inadequateness of this solution of the 
difficulty need hardly be demonstrated. For not only (i) does Spengel 
propose to insert ov after ^TCIV in 16 n, but (2) when he has trans 
posed 1 6 4 9 to follow 15 5, he is obliged to explain that what we 
then get is a sort of dialogue between the supporters of personal rule 
and of the laws 3 . 

(13) iv(vn). i u ? 12 =c. 2 i, 2 

e^o/xei/ov 8 eo-Tt KCU TUJV avr&v TroVepov Se TTJV cvBatfioviav rrjv 

Aoyoov 8eo[j.vov KOL TroXw evSat/xova avTrjv etvai ^>aTeov ei^os TC e/cao~Toi> 

rrfv dpLOTQV cTvat Kat TrpdrTovcrav TCOV dvOpuTrw KCU. Tro Xews rj [*?} rrjv 

aSwaTOv yap KaXws Trpdr- CLVTTJV, Xoiirov Icmv flirtiv. 

\ \ \ \ \ / oi\\ / * * e 

rjv fJLrj Ta KaAa Trparrovcrav oe Kat TOVTO* TravTes yap av ofJiO 
8e KaXoV epyov OVT avSpos o-etav et^at rrjv avrrjv. ocrot ycxp e 

1 Cp. Susemihl Aristotelis Politico, ter- ov dvvairo yvwplfcw. Objection : dXX 
tium ed. p. XXI. ^7rlr?;5es TrcuSeucras o VO/JLGS <f>lffTi)ffl TO. 

2 Arist. Stud. in. 26 (78), f. XoiTra T^ Si/catorarT; yvw^ri Kpiveiv Kal 

3 d\\ t crws av 0at7? rts ws avrl TOIJTOV SioiKew TOVS apxovras. TI 5 eTravopOov- 
povXeva-erai irepl ruv Kad ^/caara /caXXtor. o-^at 5t 5wcrti/, o rt clV SO^T? Treipw^vois a/J.ei- 
The reply is : dXXd nty 6<ra ye /XT) 5o/cei vov elvat TW^ Kei^vuv. Final reply and 

diopifrw 6 v^os, ou5 dV^/)W7ros decision : o /xej ou^ rbv VO^QV /crX. 


ouT TroXews ^oopts apexes Kat <po- TrXouru) TO t,r]V eu Ti.6f.VTai e^> era s, 
* aYSpta Se TroXecos Kat StKato- OVTOL KOL T rjv TTO\LV oXrjv, eaV ^ 
Kat <^>po^^crts TT^V aurryj/ e^et TrXovcrta, /x,aKaptovcriv. ocrot re ToV 
Swa/xiv Kat /xopc^i/, alv /xerao-^ooi/ TvpawiKoi/ /3tW /xaXtoTa rt/xoocrtr, 
CKacTTO? TOJV dvOpwiTcov XcycTat StKat- ourot Kat Tro Xii/ Tr}c TrXeurnov ap- 
os Kat <poVi/xos Kat o-wc^pcov. C. I ^ovcrav e^Sat/xoveo-rarryv eu at </>atei/ 
II, 12. ttV. et re rt? TOV o ; a 8t aper^v 

ttTroSe^erat, Kat TroXtv v8atp,ove<TTe- 
pav ^ cret T^V CTTrovSatorepav. C. 2 

Here the language is by no means similar and the thought that virtue 
in the state is the same as virtue in the individual seems introduced in 
different connexion in the two passages. Nevertheless they cannot 
both stand. The latter opens the discussion afresh without any allusion 
to the previous chapter, as Spengel observed l . If it is to be fitted into 
this part of the work, it must be intended to supersede some part of 
c. i. Susemihl is probably right in holding this part to be n, 12 2 . 

(14) iv(vn). 4 8, 9. Giphanius (Van Giffen) 3 calls attention to 
the difficulty of connecting the last words of 8, eVet TO ye KaXov eV 
7rX?J$ei Kat /^eye (9et eta>0e yivc<r0cu, with those immediately preceding. 
Schneider proposed to transpose the whole period to the end of the 
chapter to follow CVO-UVOTTTOS : in this way 90 Xe^^cls opos would refer 
to the number of the citizens. If the words rt...y(Wcr0ai are in their 
right place and are to be taken with 8, the preceding sentence 0et as 
ydp... TO TraV must be parenthetical. They cannot go with 9 as the 
passage stands. Koraes omitted 810 : it is a smaller change, with 

Bocker 4 , to transpose eVet...ytVeo-0at to follow aVayKatoi/ in 9. 

(15) IV (vil). 8. 2 otoi/ etVe TpO(/>7/ TOIJTO IdTiv etTe xoopas TrX^os etT 
aXXo Tt TCOI> TotovToov IvTiv. Bojesen 5 saw that these words should follow 
directly upon i oo-a Tats TroXeo-tv aray/<atov vrrdp^ecv which they illus 
trate. They are not suitable to be instances of eV Tt KOIVOV Kat Ta^To 
TCHS Kotvajvots aXX^s Kotvw^ia?, as on the ordinary arrangement they 
might be taken to be. 

(16) iv (vn). 8 3, 4 OTO.V 3 ^...KT^ o-eoJs eoriv. The proposal to 
make this passage follow TroXtretas at the end of 5 serves to bring the 
mention of Kotvwj/ta in 4 nearer to the KOIVCOVOIS of 2 8 . 

1 Ueber die Politik, pp. 45, 48. 3 Comm. pp. 921, 2. 

2 Jahrb.f. Philol. xcix. 1866 p. 602. 4 op. c. 13, 14. 

See also Bocker De quibusdam Pol. Ar. 5 Bidtrag (Copenhagen 1845) pp. 24 

locis (Greifswald, 1867) P- 6f., Spengel 26. 

Arist. Stud. HI. 30 (82). 6 Susemihl Qitaest. Crit. v. p. 15. 



(17) iv (vn) cc. 13 15. Wilson 1 regards c. 13 as a shorter dupli 
cate of cc. 14, 15. "In each the same question is proposed, what is 
"happiness or the chief good? (compare 1332 ay and 1333 a 15, 16); 
" and the discussion of it is followed in each by a transition, in almost 
"the same terms, to the subject of education (cp. 13 10 13, with 
" 15 6, 7 6Vt fjtlv ovv...r)x@ ai )-" These transitional passages stand as 
follows : 

a AAct /Jirjv dyaOoi ye Kal O-TTOV^OLOL ... <rrjv dperijv,> KCU cm Si avrrfv, 
yivovra.1 8 LO. rptcoj/. ( n) ra Tpta <avepoV CK TOUTCOV TTCOS oe Kat Sta 
Se ravr ecrTt Averts e$os A-oyos. TtVtov carat, rovro &r) Oewprjreov, 

TJ 8t^p^yU,ei/ot Trporepoj/ 

Kat $ous Kat Xoyou 

Se Trotoi;? /xev rtvas 

Kat yap <$>vva.i Set Trpoorov otov avOpw- rvy^dvofJiev 

TTOI/ a/\Aa /x^ Ttoj/ a A-Xooi/ rt a)toi , etra ore 

Kat TrotoV rtva TO croj/x.a Kat TT}I/ Set. 

if/v^rjv. erta Se ouSei/ o^>eA.os <f>vva.i elv 

ra yap e^r/ /xera/?aXXetv Trotet eyta Trporepov, A.OITTOV Se 

yap ecrrt Sta T?7S <^v<rea)S e7ra/x- Tro repov TratSeureot TW Xoya) 

^ovra S(a rcov e$a!v CTTI TO Trporepov rj Tots e^ecrtv. 
Kat TO /?eA.Ttoi/. ( 12) Ta /xe^ 
a XA.a TCOV ^wooi/ fjudXicrra ^nev rfj 
fi, fJUKpd S evia Kat TOt? 
e^ecrtv, ay$pa>7ros Se Kat Xoyw* /xovov 
yap e ^et Ao yov. 

Set ravra <j-vfJL<>wve iv d\- ravra yap Set Trpos aXXyXa 

. TroXXd yap Trapa TOV? o-u/x.^ covet i/ crv/z^toi/t av TT/P aptcr- 

Kat TT)I/ <pvcrLV Trpdrrovcn rf\v ei/Se ^eTat yap Sn^apr^KeVai 

Sta TOI^ Xoyov, eaV Tretcr^ojcrii aXAw? Kat TOV Aoyoi/ TT^S j3eXTLcrT7)s VTTO- 

/5e/\TtOF. ^e cretos Kat Sta TCOV euojv op:otcos 

rj^Oai. 15 6, 7. 

otovs etvat SeT TOVS 

StooptV/xe^a Trporepov TO Se 
epyov ^Sry TratSeta?. Ta 

Ta S aKOvovTes. 13 10 13. 

There is certainly a striking parallelism here : compare especially 
J 3 !3 wi tn Totrrwv Se 7rotoi;?...e^ecriv in the right hand column; but it is 
partly covered by the reference back rvyxdvo^ev Se Su/p^eVoi Trporepov, 
which Wilson is obliged to suppose inserted or to be, possibly, a reference 

Journal of Phil. X. pp. 84, 85. 


to the Ethics. That there is an advance in the treatment of cc. 14, 15 
will become apparent on a close comparison with c. 13 : see the 
Analysis (p. 116). Similarly in in. c. 9 there is an elaboration of the 
earlier sketch in in. c. 6 ; in i. cc. 5 7 the conclusions anticipated in 
i. c. 4 are but amplified and supported \ 

In 13 12 the fact that man often obeys reason in opposition to his 
habits and nature is a strange reason why habits and nature should be 
in harmony with reason 2 . Hence Docker 3 proposed to transpose wcrre 
...aAA?; Aois to follow (3e\TLov at the end of n. In this place it 
emphasizes the agreement necessary between the habits and the natural 
capacity of our citizens. But Wilson points out that the parallel clause 
in c. 15 refers to Aoyos and Wrf } hence he defends the order of the 
manuscripts. The meaning then would be : " reason ought to work for 
" the end which the legislator has in view in harmony with nature and 
" habit ; for men may be induced by reason to do what they would 
" never do by nature or by habit." 

(18) iv (vn). 16 4, 5 or^e Sov 8e 7rdvTa...TovTovs. This solution of 
the whole question discussed in this chapter should surely follow the 
difficulties enumerated, and not interrupt the enumeration, as it does at 
present. It is proposed to remove it to follow 8 7r\r]6vov In <r) /xic/joV>. 
If this be done, (i) 6 TTI 8 o ran/ viuv KT\. will directly explain 4 
ert 8 o0ev apxo/zevoi.. .flovXycrtv; (2) the transposed passage will have an 
excellent continuation in 9, which fixes the ages for marriage at 18 
and 37(?) respectively 4 . 

(19) iv (vn). 17 6 Ta? Se Starao-ets...8iaretvo/xei/ot?. These remarks 
must apply to the very earliest infancy. If so they ought to come after 
3 aa-Kfjo-Lv for in 4 Aristotle goes on to discuss rrjv e xo/xeV^v yXuctav. 
The transposition suggested is supported by the fact that then eVt- 
o-Korreov 8?? will follow directly upon 5, to which in any case it must be 
referred 5 . 

(20) IV (vil). 17 T2 vvv fJicv ovv V 7rapaSpo/A77...aVayKaiW. These 
remarks are clearly intended to put a close to the whole discussion of 
8 14. If so, they should come at the end, i.e. after 

(? Svcryei/eiai ) in I4 6 . 

(21) V (vill). 4 7. The clause Set Se OVK CK TCOI> Trporepcov 
aAA e/c T<JJV vvv a^TaycovtcrTcis yap T^? TraiSeias vvv e 

4 Susemihl Quaest. Crit. vn. p. 15. 
ed. pp. xxi, xxn. s Susemihl in Philologus xxv. 1867. 

2 Cp. Susemihl in PhiloL xxv. 1867. pp. 408 9. 
p. 403. 6 Susemihl /. c. 

8 op. c. 15. 


TTpoTepov 8 OVK eixov must refer to the Lacedaemonians and their recent 
rivals the Thebans. They would stand better directly after the criti 
cism on the Lacedaemonians in 4 ; the intermediate remarks, 5, 6, 
being of a general character and a deduction from this particular case 1 . 
Moreover Se should then be changed to Brj. 

(22) V (vill). V 17 en Se aVpocu/xevot rwv (JUfJUja ttiW ytVovrat Travre? 
o-ufi7ra$et? Kat ^wpt? rtov pu$/xd>j/ /<at TO)!/ /.teXcoi aura)! . As they Stand, 
these words, introduced by en, should give a second reason on yivo^Oa 
Trotot rive? ra ^77 Sta T//S /XOVO-IK???, the first being the enthusiasm 
inspired by the melodies of Olympos. But the reason alleged is surely 
only a generalization of the first : enthusiastic strains inspire en 
thusiasm : and, further, all men become attuned to the mood of 
musical imitations by listening to them. Now a little further down, 
1 8, we are told that "rhythms and melodies afford the best imitations, 
" short of the reality, of emotions, virtues, and moral qualities gene- 
" rally : which is plain from their effects. For as we listen to music the 
" soul undergoes a change." But why should this change of mood in 
the soul prove music to be the best means of faithfully pourtraying 
morality and emotion? Transfer to this place the words from 17, 
and the reason is plain : "because all men are attuned to the mood of 
the musical imitations to which they listen, even if there be no words, 
but mere rhythm and melody," i.e. a purely instrumental performance 2 . 

(23) V (vill). V 25 Kat ns eotKe o-uyyeVeta rats ap/xovuxis Kat rot? 
* eTyat (Sio TroAAot <acrt rcoi/ CTO^WV ot fjilv dpfioviav elvai TT/V 

rfv, ot 8 x H/ ap/xoi/tav). Bocker 3 recommends that this, the only 
clause not at present included in the huge period stretching from 17 
to the end of c. 5, should be transposed to a place before the apodosis, 
i.e. after 23 and before CK p\v ovv rovruv 24. 

(24) vi (iv). cc. 3, 4 119. There are good grounds 4 for be 
lieving that this portion of Bk. vi (iv) is not genuine. From the 
parallelism of 4 7, on /xev ovv TroXtretat TrXctovs KOL oY r)v atnW, etp^rat 
Sion 8e TrXetovs TWV etp^jaevoov, Kat rtVes Kat Sia TI, Xeyco^tev ap^jv Xapovres 
rr)v lpY)[j,vr}v TrpoTfpov, to 4 2o (the first words after the suspected 
section) on ovv etat TroXtretat TrXet ovs, Kat Sta Ttvas atria?, etp^rat 
Trporepov, the inference was drawn that there were two interpolations. 
That the second is not a continuation of the first, but rather a parallel 
version unskilfully added by the compiler 5 , seems probable from the 

1 Susemihl ib. p. 411, Q. C. iv. 20, 3 op. c. p. 18. 

also Bocker independently op. c. p. 18. 4 Susemihl in Rhein. Mus. XXI. 1866. 

2 Susemihl Philologus xxv. 1867. 411 554 560. 

413, Q. C. iv. 20, Spengel Arist. Stud. 5 See Cook Wilson in Joitrnal of 

44, 4*. Philol. x. 80, 8 r. 


TrpcoTOV /uev yap e OIKIOOV cruy/<a- 
opaj/zev Tracras ras TroXets, 
TraXtv TOUT on TOTJ 

fact that the promise made in 4 7 SioVt Se TrXetous KrX, is never 
redeemed: instead of this the main subject of c. 3 is treated over 
again in 4 7 19. We will here cite only the more exact corre 
spondences adduced by Wilson in support of this view. 

TOV /zev ovv eivat TrXetous TroXtreias o^oXoyoryxev yap ovy ev uepos 

amov OTI Traces ecrTt yu-ep^ TrXetto aXXa 7rXeo Trucraj/ eveiv TroXtv. 4 7. 
TroXeoos TOV dpiOfjiov, 3 I. Ka ^ ydp at TroXets OVK. e eVos aXX 

IK TToXXcuv cruyKetvTat /xopuov, a) o~7rep 
etpirjTQ.i TToXXaKt?. 4^9. 

ev /xev ovv IO~TI TO ?rept TT^V rpo^rjv 
, ot KaXoi /xevot yetopyot , 
Se TO KaXov/xevov /3avav- 


TptVov Se <TO> ayopatov, KTX 
TeYapTov Se TO OrjriKov, TT^TTTOV 
Se ye vos TO TrpoTroXeya^o-ov, o TOUTWJ/ 
ovSev yjTTOV avayKaToV eo~Tiv inrdp- 

Kr ^ 4 9 ? I0 - 

-X ^avepov oVt TO ye 

v avayKatov ecrTt T^9 
TToXetos pioptov. x * cfiSofJLOV Se TO 
Tats ovo-iiais XetTovpyovv, o?rep KaXov- 
/xev evTropovs. oySoov Se TO 


/xev euvropovs avay/<atov en at 
TOVS S aTro povs TOVS Se yu.eo"ov5, Kat 
TOJV ev7ropa>v Se Kat TCOV aVo ptov TO 
/xev oVXtTtKov TO V S aOTrXov. Kat 
TOV yu,ev yecopytKOV Si^txov o pco/x-ev 
oi/Ta, TOV S ayopatov, TOV Se 

Sdvavcrov. T. i, 2. 
< o yy > 

Ti ?rpos Tals KaTa TrXouTov Sta- 
(fropcus eo"Ttv ^ yLtev KaTa yeVos ly Se 

KttT apCTT^V. * ^ Kat t Tl S^ TOt- 

O{)TOV eTepov etp-^Tat TroXews eu at 
/xepos ev Tot? Trept TT;V aptcrTOKpaTt aj/ 
CKe? yap StetXo/xev e/c Troawv p^pwv 
eo-Tt Tracra Tro Xts. 3 4. 

^avepov rotvuv OT6 TrXetovs avay- 
etvat TToXtTeta?, etSet Sta^>e- 
poucras aXX^Xajv* Kat yap TavT* etSet 

o// \r , e 

OLO.(ppL Ta IXepW (T<tHt)V aVTCOV. 3 V ^ 


etvat Ttvas apeT7;s TCOV 
4 i5i 7- 

Xa^etv etS?;, TrpcoTov /xev av a?ro- 
Stcopt^o/xev oTrep aVayKatov Trav 

O ^> \ 


et SeTOO^avTa etvat Set /xovov, 
S etev Sta(^opai, . . . o T^S o"f^ 

avayKatov apa TroXtTetas etvat TOQ-- 
oo-at Trep Taeis KaTa ras 


\7](f)9<j)CrL TOVTtOV 7TCXVTS Ot evSe^O- 

/xevot orwSi;ao-/xot, Trotvfo-ovo-iv ctSr; 
^ojou Kat TOO~ai)T etSw TOU 4 <1)t *^ oo"at 
Trep at o"u^evets TOOV avayKatcJV /xoptaiv 

s eto~i Kat KaTa ras Sia^opa? eto~tv* TOV a^Tov S^ TpoTrov Kat TOJV 

3 6. 

TToXiTeiwv. 4 8, 9. 


/xaXtcrra Se SOKOVO-LV etyat 8vo, aXXa Trei/ecr^at /cat TrXouTetV 

KaOdirep erri TWV Tn/eu/zaTwy Xeyerat avrovs dSvvarov. Sto ravra 

ra //iv /Jo peta ra Se vorta, ra 8 /xaXtcrra etVat SoKet TroXeco?, ot ev- 

aXXa TOfTtoi/ 7rapeK/3ao~ets, ovrco /cat Tropot /cat ot aTropot. ert Se 8ta TO 

Ttor TToXtTetoov 8vo, 8^/xos Kat dXtyap- ws CTTI TO ?roXv TOT)? /xci/ oXtyovs 

^ ia. 3 6. eti/at TOT)? 8e TroXXov?, TavTa ivavria 

/xepTy (^atverat TOJJ/ T^? TroXcws /xo- 

pt (OV. OLKTTe Kttt TttS TToXtTetaS KttTCt 

Ta? VTrepo^a? TOVTCOV KaOicrrdcrL, Kat 
oVo TroXtTetat 8o/<o{;o-tv etrat, S^/JLO- 
KpaTta Kat oXtyap^ta. 4 1 8, 19. 

Whereas in 3 4 the one version refers to Bk. iv (vn), ei/ TOIS Trept 
Tr}v a pto-TOKpaTiW (whence it may be inferred that its author had the 
original order of the books before him), " the second version inserts, 
" instead of the reference, a long passage similar to that part of Bk. 
" iv (vii) which the first version refers to." 

To sum up, there does appear to be sufficient evidence of a parallel 
version: it must be remarked, however, (i) that the second version, as 
it now stands, plainly refers to the former 4 7 a-px*i v ^a/3oVres -nji> 
ei/oTjju.eVip/ 1 : therefore this at least must be due to an editor who wished 
to make the two continuous. (2) There seems to be nothing in c. 3 to 
correspond with the simile of an animal in 4 7, 8 ; for the sense and 
bearing of 3 5, 6, suggested by Wilson, appear very different. 

(25) VI (iV). 6 2, 3. Tot? ($ ttXXotS JJLT^LV ^CTTtV, OTOLV 

TO Ti/JLTjjjia TO Sttopta/xeVov VTTO rwv vop-wv. Sio Tracrt Tots KT^o-a/xe 
. oXws /xev yap TO JJLCV /xr} e^elvai 7ra<riv oXtyap^tKov, TO 8e 

The clause Sio,../xeTe;(eiv is omitted by the manuscripts of the second 
recension. Either it is an interpolation or, if genuine, out of place ; for 
there is nothing preceding 8to of which it could be the effect. Thurot 2 
would find a place for it after Trpoo-o Swv ovcrwv, but he has to admit that 
f&lvai (T)(o\a.,Lv is forced and unusual ; it is eeu/at /xeTe^ctv wherever 
this subject comes up, and the second claim forms no real antithesis to 
the first. Rassow 3 gives a more satisfactory contrast by inserting S^/xo- 
KpaTiKov after eetvat : " on general grounds to exclude from citizenship 
"those who have the requisite amount of property would be an 
u oligarchical measure, to admit them democratical." After this rule 

1 " The words may perhaps refer to 2 Etudes sur Aristote 60, 6 

Bk. iv (vn) " (Wilson). But he does 3 Bemerkungen pp. 13, 14. 

not further explain. 


has been laid down the clause 8io...//eTcxv comes in with excellent 
sense as stating the practical result. It will be necessary to insert 8 
after crxoXaeiv. 

(26) vi (iv). c. I2 1 . The subject of this chapter is the third of the 
investigations enumerated in c. 2 4 6, eVetTa KOL ruv aXXwv TIS rtVii/ 
alpeT-ij: what form of government is most adapted to a state under 
given circumstances. After the general conditions, that it must be that 
supported by TO Kpelrrov whether their preponderance comes from TO 
TrotoV or TO TTOOW, Aristotle points out (i) when a democracy is desirable 
in the words of 3, OTTOV /xev ovv v7repe^eL...TovT(Dr (2) when an oligarchy 
would suit better in the remainder of 3, OTTOV Se TO TOJV evjroptav,.. 
n-X-tjOovs ; while (3) the circumstances favourable to a Polity (in the 
technical sense) are pointed out in 4, 5, OTTOV Se TO ruv /x,eo-oH/...o 
jae o-o?. The similarity of their form proves that these three sentences 
ought to be taken closely together : (2) and (3) are however separated 
by the words Set 8 del TOV vo^oOir-r]^ I o/xois TOUTOIS, the former part 
of 4. Not only so, but this sentence has nothing to do with the 
special conditions of an oligarchy : eV rfi TroAn-cm must refer to Polity in 
the technical sense ; accordingly the sentence belongs to the second 
investigation of c. 2, TIS KOivordrr} KT\. Moreover from 12 6, oo-w 8 
av a p. e LVOV right on to the end of c. 13, TO ap^co-Oat, Aristotle never 
recurs to the enquiry TIS TLO-LV alpcTij. He appears to go off on the 
subject of the stability of Polities (in the technical sense), ending with a 
brief historical digression, 13 6 12 2 . 

The conclusion to which these facts point is as follows : The enquiry 
TIS TUTIV alperij is broken off abruptly at o /xeVos in 1 2 5 ; if it was ever 
complete cp. VII (vi). I. 5, Kal TUV XOITTCOI/ Tro/Wacoi TIS cru/x.(^epet TLCTIV, 
eipT/Tcu Trporepov the rest of it has been lost. The beginning of 12 4, 
Set 8 aet...Toi;Toi>?, together with 12 6 and the whole of c. 13, belong 
to the previous enquiry. Biicheler with great probability would insert 
12 4, Set...TOirroi;s + 12 6, c. 13 I 6, oo-o) 8 at a pe LVOV. . .erepwv 
fjiovov in the account of the constitution of Polity given in c. 9 6, 
between o e /xei/ ovv T/OOTTOS T-^S /-tttcws OVTOS and TOV 8 eu fjL(ju^O a ^ where 
certainly the subject-matter is strikingly similar. For the remainder of 
c - : 3> 7 I2 J Set Se TYIV 7roXtTeiav...ttpx eo "^ at > ne finds a fitting place at 
the end of c. 9 after oXw?. 

(27) vni (v). i 8. There are two ways in which revolutions 
arise, Sto /cat at //-eTa/3oXat yivovrai Stews oVe p.\v yap-.-tKetVcov, OTC Se... 

1 See Susemihl in Rhein. Mus. xxi. 2 The reader may satisfy himself of this 

564 ff. ; also Bocker op. cit. n, pp. 24 by careful examination of the passage : 
32. cp. Analysis p. 121 f. 


But in 9 another way is seemingly brought in In Trept TOV 

Kal rjTTov KT\, and in 10 another eYi vrpos TO /xe pos n KT\. 
Further, these two latter cases properly belong to the first alternative, 
when the revolutionary party wish for a change in the government; 
they are both equally opposed to the other 6Ve Se /o-X, where the 
object is not to overthrow the form of government, but to crush the 
present holders of power. If then Aristotle wrote in the proper logical 
order, the place for the second leading alternative ore 8e 
jUOvap^tW is in II between TroXtreia and Travra-^ov 1 . 

Wilson 2 discovers a parallel version of i 2 7, 8et Se 
OTacreojv etcriv, in I II 1 6 Travra^ov ydp,..Twv TOLOVTOIV 
The most striking correspondences which he adduces are : 

Set Se TrpcoToi/ vTroXajSeiV rrjv o/AoXoyowre? Se TO GwrXws eu/at 

apx^v, on TroXXat yeyeV^imxt TroXt- StKatov TO Kar a^iaj/, Sia<epoi/- 

reTai TravToov /xev o/zoXoy owTtor Tat, KaOairep eXe^^T^ Trporepov, 

TO StKator /cat TO /caT* avaXoytai/ ot /x,ev OTI, eav Kara TL ICTOL 

tcror, TO^TOU 8 a/xapTa^oi/rojv, too-Trep icrot oXws 

ttp^Tat KCU TTpOTtpOV. S^/XOS /XCF 

yap eyeveTO e TOV 

(on yap eXevOepoi Trai/re? 

a/rXw? icro6 etvat vo//t^oL cr(,v), o Xi- 

8 CK TOO) avi o oa;? eV TI ot o on, eav KaTa Tt avtcroi, 

oXws etyat a vtVo-us VTTO- 7rai/TO)v aj/tVwv cx^toi)o"ti/ eavTOi;?. 

Kar ovo-iav yap aVLaoi 810 Kat fJLaXiQ-ra. 8vo ytvovTat ?roXt- 

OVTC? avrXoos uVio"ot VTroXa/x^avovo"tv Tetat, 8/y/xos Kat oXtyap^ta. 

etrat). 2, 3. 13, 14. 

Further " the main thought of these two parallel passages is repeated 
" in a shorter form " in 2 2, 3 : " there is here then perhaps another 
" re-writing, seemingly by a later hand, of the introduction to the book 
" and with this third beginning seems to cohere the rest of cc. 2, 3." 
Wilson sees in each of these a probable reference to Bk. in; at i 2, 
J 3> 2 2 - It must be observed however (i) that the main difficulty 
of c. i lies in 8 n, and is not removed by these suggestions: (2) 
there is a real advance in c. 2 as compared; for instance, with i n 
16: and yet (as Wilson sees) if i u 16 is another recension of 
i 2 7, 2 2, 3 has quite as much right to be so considered. (3) It 
is possible that 3 14, o~Tao-iaoro-t 8 eV ^v Tats dXiyap^tai5...tcrot 6Wes, 

1 Susemihl Qnaest. Crit. v. p. 10. ~ Journal of Philology x. 84. 


should precede i u, Travra^ov ydp KrX At all events that passage is 
out of place where it stands in c. 3 l . 

(28) VIII (v). C. 4. In this chapter i 7, ytvovrai /xet/...e7n7pe- 
aa-dek, have for their subject the cases where orao-is has arisen from 
dissensions amongst the leading men. The subject of 8 12, /xera- 
fiaXXovcri Se /<ai...7rpos iroXXous, is wholly different. Aristotle returns to 
the case which he calls in C. 3 6 Si avfyatv rrjv Trapd TO dvaXoyov, 
when any party in the state has become over-powerful. This averts 
may be Kara TO TTOOW or Kara TO TTOIOI/ ; but all the examples in 3 7, 8 
illustrate the former kind. It seems best then to transpose 4 8 12, 
jjieTa(3d\\ovai Se Kal...7rpos TroA/Ws (which contain examples of the 
latter kind) to follow Suracrrettts at the end of 3 S 2 . 

(29) VIII (v). 6 IO 13, o/JLOvoovcra Se dAiyap^t a. . .77 !</>iaSov. In 

its present place this passage interrupts the orderly enumeration of the 
causes which tend to overthrow oligarchy owing to internal dissensions: 
(i) 6 2 5 continual decrease of the privileged body, (2) 5 7 rise 
of demagogues amongst them, (3) 8, 9 extravagance and reckless 
living, (4) 14, 15 insults offered Kara ya /xovs rj SiKas, (5) 16 refusal 
on the part of some oligarchs to go the full length in oppression of the 
Demos. In 10, n, coming between (3) and (4), the conditions of 
permanence in an oligarchy are touched upon ; a better place for them 
is after 16 ; while 12, 13 are probably interpolated " . 

A few remarks may be useful on the suggestions here passed under 
review. Though necessarily an unsatisfactory remedy 4 , transposition 
has been used with great effect in some authors (e.g. Lucretius) and has 
always been a recognised expedient. But it has been most successful 
when applied to verse and to dislocations arising mechanically through 
the displacement of leaves or by carelessness of transcribers. Now only 
a small part (if any) of those here assumed can have had such an origin. 
The most reasonable account of the majority presupposes an editor 
dealing unskilfully with Aristotle s materials 5 . In proportion as this is 

1 Susemihl Politica tcrt. cd. p. xxiil; tionis ordini inserere sibi proposuerit, 
Bocker op. cit. 37. in margine hie illic adnotasse ; posteros 

2 Bocker op. cit. 40, 41. autem, qui ediderunt libros, cum nesci- 

3 Susemihl Qnacst. Crit. v. 12, 13. rent, quid notis illis uoluisset scriptor, 

4 " Before we can prove that a transpo- ineptissime confusas in hunc, quern ho- 
sition is correct, we must have shewn die tenent, locum contulisse, quern for- 
not only that the passage cannot be tasse reuera mutilatum lacunosumue 
placed in its old position, but that it deprehenderant." Bocker op. cit. 32, 
must be placed in its new." Postgate 33. There was no place for footnotes in 
Notes p. 24. an ancient book : but some instances in 

5 "Hoc est uerisimillimum : ipsum the above list e.g. (3) (n) (15) (21) 
Aristotelem omnes has particulas, quas (23) (27) (29) have quite the look of 
in altera Politicorum recensione sine marginal notes. Compare the remark of 
uberius tractare siue continent! exposi- Welldon Translation p. 100 n. 2. 


admitted the certainty that a given transposition restores the original 
form, due to its being logically required, diminishes : and room must 
always be allowed for the misgiving "ne hoc modo ipsum potius Aristo- 
" telem corrigamus quam editores eius antiques: certe cur ab eo ipso in 
" libris celerrime scriptis, nequaquam diligenter ubique elaboratis, inco- 
"hatis potius quam perfectis optimam semper disponendi rationem 
" esse inuentam non sane scio cur credam 1 ." 

These observations are all the more necessary as the most recent 
edition of any part of the Politics" carries still further the disintegration 
of the text, transposing and rejecting supposed interpolations in a part 
of the treatise hitherto believed not to need these remedies 3 . The most 
important change introduced is to make Bk. i. cc. 8 u, 7rep< XPVP- -- 
Tio-ri/a;?, precede the discussion Trepl SCO-TTOTOU K<H 8ov/\ov, thus inserting 
them in i. c. 3 3 between XP^/XXXTIO-T 1/075 and Trpeuroi/ Se. That the 
topics of Bk. i. would be thus better arranged may be admitted : but 
the probability (not to say the certainty) that Aristotle even intended 
ultimately so to arrange them will require cogent proof, especially if it 
can be shown that with the present order the transition from topic to 
topic is natural, the development logical, the indications of a disposition 
of the subject-matter borne out in the sequel. Briefly to sum up, 
Schmidt presents Bk. i. in the following order : c. i, c. 2 i 6 TraTSas: 
then comes 8 presented as two parallel versions : 

iq 8 IK TT\f.iovu>v KCO/XOJV KOIVUIVLOL 07 ^>rf> Trdcrrjs c^ovcra Trepas Trjs 

re/Vetos TroXts rj^tq. yivo/^err; /xej/ ovv aurapKeux?, w CTTOS etTretK, I252b 28. 
TOU (.rjv eW/cer, ovcra oe rov ev L,rjv 

reXos e crrt.] olov yop eacrrov ecrrt 

TV/S yei/ecrecos reXeo-^eto-^?, Tavrqv 

</>ajUei/ rtjv (frvviv etj/at eKaVrov, <[^y((TTOV ayaO 

d> (T7rep av^pcoTrov ITTTTOV otKt as. Sio <yap> o^ evtKa. KOL TO TeXos 

TTttcra TroXts cfrvorei coriV, etTrep Kat ai TIVTOV. y 8 avTapKeia [KOL] 

TTpomxi Kotvcovt at. TeXog yctp avrrj <a)o~T> Kai p.\Ti<jrov. 2 8, 

CKCLVWV. 2 8, 1 252 b 28 34. 1 252 b 34 1 253 a i. 

Then follows 2 7 SLO KOL TO 7rpwTov...To)v 6tv. Then another 
double recension consisting mainly of 2 13, 14 : 

1 Susemihl Politico, tertiiim ed, p. xxvi. what follows Susemihl Politico, terliunt 
Cp. also p. xin. ed. (Teubner) pp. xxiv xxvi. 

2 Aristotelis Politicorum liber privnis 3 Even Krohn Zur Kritik 33 35 re- 
ex recensione M. Schmidt (Jena 1882. gards the first book as Aristotle s. He 
4to). The arrangement adopted is justi- nowhere states how far it had been ma- 
fied in an article in Jahrb. f, Philol. nipulated by the oiKeiuv 

cxxv. 1882. 801 824. Compare with 4 at rt<a> for rt. 



[6Vi jtc^i/ ow T? TroXts /cat <pv<rei Kal Trpore- 
pov 7) /ca<rros 5^\ov. ] et yap /XT^ avrdp- 
Krjs e/cao-ros ^(opr^et5, o/xotws TOIS 
a AAot? /utepecrtv e^et ?rpos TO 6 Aor. 
d Se /XT; Swa/aevos KOtycoj/etv, ^ /x?;8ei/ 

6Y auTapKeiai/ ovSey /xepo? 

, [cixrre 17 drjplov rj ^eds.] 2 14 : 

1253 a 2529. 

a re ?rep aC v ^ ^^ wcrTrep ei/ TreTTOts. 
2 10 : i253a 6, 7. 

Kat TrpoTepov 877 rrj <u<ret 77 TroAts 
r) otKta Kat eKaoros ^/xwv eortV. 

TO yap oAov TrpoVepov uVayKaiov 
etvat TOV /xepous. aVatpov/xeVoi; yap 
TOU 6Aoi> OTJK eo~Tat [TroOs ou Se x 6 / 5 ] t 
yu.^ o/xcovv/xoos [wcTTrep et rts \eyoi. T^V 
\idivrjv. 5ta0^ape?(ra 7ap <ou/c> carat, 
Totaur??.] 7rai/Ta yap T(3 epyw topto"rat 
Kat TT; 8wa/>tet, (ioo-Te /X^KCTI Tota^Ta 
oi/ra ou AeKTe ov Ta avra eti/ai, aAA 
ofj-uvvpa. 2 12, 13: 1253 a 19 

What is left of c. 2 follows in the usual order, /. <?. 9, 10 CK 
. . . eTTi^u/.r^T ^ ?, 10 12 Stdrt. . .Tro Atv, 15, 16 t^ucret. . .Kpto~t5 : also 
c - 3 r 3 as f ar as x/ 37 7/ xaTto " rtK ^ ? - 1 hen cc. 8 n in the following 
order : 8 i 13 -n-purov /xei/ ovv aTrop^crete^ (the preceding sentence of 
8 i oAws...^ is enclosed in brackets)... oiKt as : 10 i 3 S^Aoi/... 
^ojcov : 8 14, 15; 9 I Kal eotKeF...ytVerat paXXov : 9 12, 13 Kat avrrj... 
XP^/xara)!/ KT^ crts : 9 2 12 Aa/?cop:ev...o c Kara (^vcrtv : 9 14 18 TT/S 
o otKovoyatK^s ou<o"7s> xP r )l JLO - TLa rLK *)s...opov : 10 4, 5 ; c. 1 1 j c. 12 i 
as far as ya/xtK?/. The rest of c. 3 follows, /. . 3, 4 TrpwTov [8e] ?repi 
oeo~7roTot;. . .yStatov yap: cc. 4 6 as usual ^ c. 7 2 5 ^ f 16 ^ ^^ SecrTro - 
T7^5. ..OrjptvTLKij, after which ]) 8et ^prjcrOaL...Tov TroXefJiov 

should be inserted from c. 8 12 : then 7 i, 2 <ayepov 8e...t o-a>i/ 
lastly cc. 12, 13 from Kat ydp ywatKos (in 12 i) to the end. TR.] 

1 The parallel versions here given 
hardly deserve that name if compared 
with those pointed out by Spengel, Suse- 
mihl, Wilson. It is essential that the 
same thought, or something very similar, 
should be found repeated with a mere 
variation of language. Schmidt employs 
the two columns to separate genuine 
Aristotelian fragments from the additions 
of editors. In the right hand column 
above, the conception of avrapKeia. is 
found three times, and the passages where 

it occurs are judged by him to be addi 
tions to the original Aristotle (op. c. 804) 
because, if the end of the state is eff frjv, 
it cannot be avrdpKeia. This then, he 
argues, is an instance of two independent 
definitions which have been blended into 
one. Similarly with other cases where, 
according to his view, the present text, 
or, as Krohn calls it, our old recension , 
has been formed by the comprehension of 
heterogeneous materials.] 



INTRODUCTION. B. I. cc. i, 2. 

I. As the end and aim of every society is .a good, the end and aim 
n oLihfi-State, the highest society under which all the resJ;_aj.eJr)lujied r js 
/ the highest good : i i. 

II. The assertion (in the Politicus of Plato) that the difference 
between the family and the state is merely quantitative, not qualitative, 
and hence that there is no essential difference bet^en_2Ljather J _ a 
master, a king, and a republican statesman, i 2, disproved by an 
analytical enquiry into the origin of the family, the village-community, 
and the state : i 3, 2 i. 

(a) The family is formed by nature out of the two smallest natural 
unions, of husband and wife, and of master and slave, solely for the 
support and propagation of life : 2 2 5. 

(b) In the same natural manner out of the household or family 
grows the village-community, the first in the ascending scale of societies 
formed for purposes wider than the satisfaction of mere every-day wants. 
Out of the village arises the state, in which the primitive form of govern 
ment was accordingly monarchy: 2 5 7. 

(c) The state itself then, the most complete society, springing up, 
like the rest, to provide the bare means of living, continues to exist for 
the full development and perfecting and independence of life. It is, 
in a higher sense of the term, most truly a natural growth ; and man 
is a being by nature ordained for civil society, 2 8, 9, far beyond all 
other animals, because he alone possesses speech and the perception 
of good and evil, of right and wrong : 2 10 12. 

(d) Moreover the state is in the order of nature prior to the 
family and to the individual : 2 13, 14. 

(e) Only the actual establishment of the state raises man to what 
he really is and endows him with those higher gifts of virtue, in the 
absence of which he is no better far worse indeed than any of the 
brutes: 2 15, 16. 

I. cc. i 8. 99 

PART I: OF THE FAMILY: B. I. cc. 313. 

A. Of the Family in general. There being three fundamental constituents 

of the family, the subject is divided into a consideration of the several relations (i) of 
master and slave, (2) of husband and wife (the conjugal relation), (3) of father and 
child (the parental relation). To which must be added a consideration of wealth 
and its acquisition (xp?7/ucm<rTiK?7) ; the relation of this subject to that of the family 
-fi) 1 is a disputed point needing investigation : 3 i 3. 

B. Special Exposition : c. 3 3 c. 13 6. 

I. Of the relation of master and slave, or of Slavery : 3 37 5. 

(a) Transition to this subject, 3 3. Statement of the two main points in the 
inquiry, 3 4. 

(b) These two points discussed at length : cc. 4 6, c. 7 i 3. 

(a) The nature and justification of Slavery : cc. 46. 

(i) The nature and character of the slave : he is an animate chattel, 
c. 4. 

(ii) How far Slavery is in accord with the law of nature : cc. 5, 6. 

(a) There are as a fact men whom nature intended to be the slaves of the rest, 
c. 5. 

(^) But for that very reason slavery imposed simply by the laws of war upon 
men who are not of this sort is contrary to nature, c. 6. 

(/3) The view quoted in the Introduction from Plato s Politicus that rule 
over freemen and over slaves, whether in the family or in the state, is not 
essentially different and that it rests upon a science, is now more completely 
stated and disproved on the ground of the results just obtained, 7 i, 2. 

There are however sciences treating of the functions of master and slave. 
Wherein such science consists : 7 3, 4. 

II. Of Property and its acquisition : cc. 811. 

(Trepi 7ra<rr?s KT^crews /cat xpTifj.aTicm.Kijs : of the acquisition or management of pro 
perty, the art of wealth.) 

1 [No uniform rendering of these two The more common equivalents are, for 

words has been attempted, and the term xp^/mrKTri/cT? finance , money-making 

economic science , used a little lower art ; for OLKOVO^LKT] household manage- 

down as a virtual reproduction of one of ment , domestic economy . TR.] 
them, is without authority in this sense. 



(a) Theoretical discussion. The relation of the art of wealth 
to a theory of the family or economic science 
cc. 8 10. 

(a) The different cases possible : 8 i, 2. 

(/3) Proof that the first is inadmissible : acquisition of property does not coin 
cide with the whole field of economic science : 8 2 (6 rt ^tv ovi>...). 

(y) To decide whether the former is at any rate a branch of the latter (or even 
an auxiliary science), it is necessary, 8 3, to distinguish 

(i) direct acquisition through production by means of cattle-breeding, 
hunting, plundering, fishing, agriculture, and fruit-growing : a species of acquisi 
tion belonging as such to economic science and forming a part of it, or an 
auxiliary science : 8 3 15, 

and (ii) indirect acquisition by exchange, c. 9 : 

either (a) simple barter, not in itself unnatural provided it does not go 
beyond actual needs, 9 i 6, 

or (/ ) exchange through the medium of money, an artificial, though neces 
sary, development of barter to facilitate intercourse. So long as it remains true 
to this object and no more than a means to the easier satisfaction of actual needs 
it does not become unnatural or foreign to economic science, as it does when 
trade is carried on as a distinct profession, money is made an independent end, 
and exchange simply a means to unlimited accumulation of money and capital : 
9 7 1 8. 

(5) It is now possible to decide finally between the various alternatives remain 
ing, so far as the natural species of acquisition is concerned. This is in one respect 
an actual branch of Economic, in another respect, and more truly, only an auxiliary 
to it: 10 13. 

(e) The most unnatural species of exchange is trading with money in the strict 
sense, the lending out of money on interest, which directly makes money out of 
money : 10 4, 5. 

(b) The art of acquiring wealth in its practical application : c. 1 1. 

(a) Classification of the different branches of this art : n i 4. 

(i) Production proper : cattle-rearing, agriculture, fruit-growing ; culture 
of bees, fish, birds : 11 i, 2. 

(ii) Acquisition by means of exchange : 1 1 3. 

(a) trade: whether (r) maritime, (2) inland, or (3) retail trade; 
(^) the lending of money on interest ; 
(c) hired labour (i) of artizans, (2) of day labourers. 
(iii) Branches of a mixed nature : forestry, mining, 1 1 4. 

(/3) General remark on the different character of these various branches as judged 
by an ideal standard, 1 1 6. 

(7) For particular information as to the practical exercise of these various 
branches of acquisition reference is made to special works upon these subjects and to 

I. cc. 813. 10 1 

the stories current in various quarters of the means by which individuals have been 
enriched : i r 7 13. 

III. The management of the household, as it affects the members, 
especially in the marital and parental relations ; also in the relation of 
master and slave : cc. 12, 13. 

(a) Different nature of the rule exercised over the wife and over the children : 
c. i?. 

(b) The management of a household extends to inanimate property but es 
pecially and primarily aims at promoting virtue and excellence in the members of the 
family, preeminently in those who are free : 13 i. 

(c) Proof that even a slave is capable of a certain mental and moral excellence 
and that he requires it : that the virtue of man, woman, child, slave, is different in 
kind and degree, 13 2 12, since 

(a) although the parts of the soul are the same, they exist, differently in 
man, woman, child, and slave, 13 5 9: 

(/3) a more detailed investigation shows that by common consent certain 
qualities would not be virtues in a man which are so in a woman, a child, or a 
slave : 13 10, ir. 

(7) The virtue and excellence of a boy and a slave belong to them not in 
themselves, but in relation to another : 13 u (eirei 3...). 

(d) A more precise statement wherein the excellence of a slave consists. It 
is the master s business to train him to it. The right mode of treating slaves: 
13 1214. 

(e) The right course of training for women and boys is a subject that goes beyond 
the limits of the family and more properly belongs to the theory of the best polity : 
13 IS, l6 - 




Examination of the schemes of an ideal best polity put forward in 
the theories of preceding philosophers, together with those most com 
mendable amongst the constitutions actually established. It is shown 
that none of them really answers to the best polity : B. n. 

I. The object and principles of this review: c. i i, 2. 


a. PLATO S IDEAL STATE IN THE Republic: i 35 28. 

(a) The end which Plato assumes for the state, its utmost possible 
unity, really involves, in the form in which he assumes it, the abrogation 
of the state, and is thus incapable of realization : c. 2. 

(/?) But even granting that this is the true end and practicable it 
would not be secured by the means which Plato proposes; viz. the 
enforcement, upon the two upper classes, of community of wives and 
children and community of property: 3 i 5 13. 

(i) Arguments against community of wives and children : cc. 3, 4. 

(T) Plato thinks it a proof of perfect unity that all should apply to the same 
objects the terms mine , another s . But there is an ambiguity hi the word "all". 
Plato s view would not be correct if "all" meant "all collectively", but only if "all" 
meant "each individual": a meaning here impossible : 3 i 3. This argument 
applies also to community of property. 

(2) Men care far less about the things which they share in common than about 
what is their own. Hence the community of children will result in the total neglect 
of them by all alike : their real or nominal parents will, one and all, feel but slight 
interest in what becomes of them. So that a specific real relationship, however 
distant, would be of far more service to them than this general indeterminate pa 
ternity : 3 47. 

(3) Many parents however would inevitably recognise their own children : 

3 8, 9- 

(4) As a rule violence and outrage are avoided with especial care in the case of 
near relations, but when it is not known who these are this heed fulness disappears : 

4 i. 

II. cc. 15. 103 

(5) It is strange that in spite of the community of children Plato does not alto 
gether prohibit unnatural love but only its worst excesses ; nor even that because he 
is scandalized at its impropriety between the nearest blood-relations : 4 2 6. 

(6) The end Plato has in view is the greatest possible unity and harmony 
amongst the ruling class of citizens : all are to feel themselves members of a single 
family. But the result would be just the opposite, since when thus generalized all 
specific affection for kinsfolk would be abrogated and replaced by a feeble attach 
ment in the last degree watery and attenuated : 4 5 9. < For Plato s purpose, 
then, these institutions would have been better adapted for the third class of the 
population, than for the first two as he proposes, in order to make its members 
disunited and more obedient : 4 4. > 

(7) Plato s regulation for removing children, under certain circumstances, from 
the two upper classes into the third, and conversely, would Tie attended by great 
difficulties : and as such children are not to be informed that they were born in a 
different class, the mischiefs pointed out under (4) and (5) would be more likely to 
occur in their case : 4 9 (dXXd fj.r)v...), TO. 

(ii) Arguments against community of property : 5 113. 

(1) The different forms of communism possible, 5 i, 2. 

(2) Community of property is no doubt more conceivable where, as in the 
Platonic state, the cultivators are not the owners of the soil: 5 3. But still in all 
that relates to social intercourse, to meum and tititin, communism is shown by ex 
perience to produce much dissension, 5 4. Far preferable therefore would be that 
state of things where property in general remains in private ownership, but the laws 
have inspired the citizens with so much public spirit, that they are willing to give up 
to their fellow-citizens much of their private possessions for common use : 5 5 8. 

(3) Communism destroys the high enjoyment afforded by private property, which 
is in itself fully justified and in many respects morally noble : 5 8, 9. 

(4) With community of wives, children, and property there could be no such 
virtues as chastity (<Tw<ppo<rvvr)}, in respect of one s neighbour s wife, or liberality : 5 ro. 

(5) Lawsuits about disputed property, cases arising from perjury, &c. are not 
due, as Plato maintains, to the absence of communism, but to the prevalence of moral 
corruption : 5 u, 12. 

(6) In general Plato s procedure is unfair ; he has before him only the evils of 
which we should be rid by communism : the advantages we should lose he overlooks : 
5 13- 

(y) Further objections to the Platonic institutions generally : 
5 14-28. 

(i) Their defects are ultimately due to the defectiveness of the end which they 
subserve, as pointed out above under (a). But so far as political unity within due 
limits must be the object of political institutions it is surprising that, considering 
the great importance which Plato attaches to the right education, he should not 
seek to attain this unity amongst his citizens by education, the introduction of com 
mon messes, &c. instead of the means which he employs : 5 14, 15. 

(ii) If the Platonic institutions were really serviceable, they would have been 
carried into effect before now : 5 16. 


(iii) But the experiment would prove beyond all doubt that the practical appli 
cation of them could not be carried further than is at present actually the case in some 
states: 5 17. 

(iv) Besides, the regulations laid down by Plato are extremely imperfect. They 
only apply t the two upper classes of citizens, and equal difficulties present them 
selves whether they are extended to the third class or not. In the former case the 
true foundation of the Platonic state would be annulled ; in the latter the state would 
be divided into two hostile camps in direct contradiction of the unity intended, as 
the advantages which Plato claimed for his state (see 5 n above) would for the 
most part be rendered illusory : 5 18 24. 

(v) The analogy of animals, who have no domestic life, does not prove that 
women can share the occupations of men : 5 24 (aroTrov Se /ecu...). 

(vi) To keep the same rulers always in office is a dangerous measure, but con 
sistency on Plato s part requires it : 5 25, 26. 

(vii) Plato himself admits that his regulations do not secure the complete hap 
piness of the upper classes. If so, then further this is true of the whole state : 5 27, 28. 

b. The ideal polity of Plato s Laws : c. 6. 

(a) Comparison of the Republic with the Laws ; the relation be 
tween the schemes of polity laid down in these two works : 6 i 5. 

(/?) Criticism of the state in the Laws : 6 6 22. 

(i) It would require far too large a territory : 6 6, 7. 

(ii) It is not enough that a code of laws should take account of the land and the 
people ; the neighbouring people have also to be regarded: 6 7, 8. 

(iii) Again, the principles regulating the limit to be set on possession need to be 
expressed more clearly and fully : 6 8, 9. 

(iv) There is an inconsistency in demanding equality of landed estate without 
at the same time fixing a definite unalterable number of citizens: 6 10 13. 

(v) We are not told how the ruling citizens are to receive an education dis 
tinguishing them from the rest, nor in what this education should consist : 6 14. 

(vi) It is inconsistent to make landed estate inalienable and at the same time 
allow moveable property within certain limits to change hands : 6 15. 

(vii) The division of each citizen s real estate into two separate establishments is 
awkward: 6 15 (/cat rriv rwv olKOTrtSuv...). 

(viii) The constitution proposed in the Laivs is a combination of Oligarchy and 
Democracy, i.e. a Polity (TroAtreia) technically so called. But 

1 i ) this sort of mixed constitution, though perhaps the best on the average, 
is by no means the next best after the absolutely perfect scheme : 6 16, 17. 

(2) Plato himself calls it a blending of Democracy and Tyranny, which is 
self-contradictory and, as a matter of fact, incorrect : 6 18. 

(3) The oligarchical element is far too preponderant in this constitution of 
Plato s: 6 1921. 

(ix) The mode in which the magistrates are elected is politically unsafe : 6 22. 

II. cc. 58. 105 

c. Phaleas scheme of polity : c. 7. 

(a) Brief account of this scheme : 7 i 4. 
(ft) Criticism : 7 523. 

(i) The objection brought against Plato, 6 10, holds also against Phaleas : if 
there is to be a maximum fixed for property, then the number of children must also be 
limited : 7 5. 

(ii) Although a certain equality of possessions is no doubt of importance for the 
state, it is much more important that the estates should on the average be neither too 
large nor too small : 7 6, 7. 

(iii) Far more important, again, is equality in respect of a good education, which 
trains the intellect properly and duly moderates the desires: 7 8, 9, 10 H = 
7 1820. 

(iv) Moreover Phaleas has never sufficiently defined equality of possessions, as 
he makes no allusion to moveable property : 7 21. 

(v) In his regulation of property he ought to have taken some account of the 
external concerns and relations of the state, but he has left them altogether unnoticed : 
7 14-17- 

(vi) Phaleas prohibits all handicrafts to his citizens ; but the measures adopted 
by him to render this possible are not suited to his object : 7 22, 23. 

d. Hippodamos scheme of polity : c. 8. 

[(a) Introductory remarks on Hippodamos himself: 8 i.] 
(ft) Account of his model constitution : 8 2 7. 

(i) Number of the citizens, 8 2. 

(ii) Division into artizans, fanners, soldiers, 8 i. 

(iii) Division of the land ; a part to belong to the temples, a part to the state, a 
part to private individuals, 8 3. 

(iv) Legal regulations: 8 4, 5. 

(1) The administration of justice to be confined to three objects, 4. 

(2) Right of appeal, 4. 

(3) Alterations in the mode in which jurymen record their verdicts, 5. 

(v) Honorary distinctions for those who are the authors of useful reforms in the 
existing laws and institutions : 8 6. 

(vi) Maintenance, at the cost of the state, of the orphans whose fathers have 
fallen in war : 8 6. 

(vii) Election of magistrates : 8 7. 
(7) Criticism: 8 7 25. 

(i) That all three classes should have an equal share in all the privileges of 
citizenship is impossible : 8 7 (a-rrop^ffeie d av...) 10, 


(ii) It does not appear what is the end to be answered by such a farmer class 
owning the private lands : if it is also to cultivate the state lands its very existence is 
contrary to the object in view : yet one is at a loss to know who else could do this : 
8 10 (TL oi yeupyoi...). 

(iii) Nor is the proposal as to the mode in which the jurymen should vote, 5, 
any better: 8 13 15. 

(iv) The proposal to reward reforms in legislation, 6, is open to the objection 
that while on the one hand the unchangeableness of the existing laws is dangerous, 
8 16 22, on the other there is pressing need that any change in them should be 
attended by conditions every whit as stringent : 8 23 25. 

TIES : cc. 9 12. 

(a) The Spartan polity : c. 9. 

(a) General prefatory remark upon the twofold standard to be set 
up in criticising a polity : 9 i. 

(ft) The defects of the Spartan polity : 9 2 36. 

(i) Social defects : 9 2 19. 

(r) Under a good constitution judged by the first standard there will be 
provision that the citizens are released from all manual labour, and hence that the 
soil is cultivated by others than the citizens. I>ut the position of the Spartan 
peasantry, the Helots, is radically wrong : 9 2 4. 

(2) The license of the women, and their virtual supremacy at Sparta, are mis 
takes judged by either standard : 9 5 13. 

(3) The permission to give away or bequeath land at pleasure, the absence of 
any limit to the amount of dower, the unrestricted right of the father (or of the 
successor to his rights) to bestow an heiress upon any one he likes; all this combined 
has brought two-fifths of the Spartan land into female hands and occasioned more 
over terrible inequality of possessions with a frightful diminution in the number of 
men capable of bearing arms. In these circumstances the very law which was de 
signed to increase as much as possible the body of Spartan citizens serves only to 
swell the ranks of paupers : 9 14 19. 

(ii) Political defects: 9 19 36. 

(1) In the Ephoralty, 9 19 24: 

(2) in the Council of Elders, 9 2528 : 

(3) in the Kingly office, 9 29, 30. 

(4) Bad management of the public messes at Sparta: 9 31, 32. 

(5) The Admirals (vavapxoi), 9 33. 

(6) All the institutions tend solely to military excellence, 9 34, which is, after 
all, but a means to an end and not an end in itself, 9 35. 

(7) Defects in the financial administration, 9 36. 

II. CC. 812. 107 

(V) Criticism of the Cretan polity : c. 10. 

(a) How the resemblance between the Cretan and Spartan polities may be 
historically explained : 10 i, 2. [Digression on the geographical position of Crete 
and its political relations under Minos : 10 3, 4.] 

(/3) Comparison of the Cretan and Spartan polities : 10 516. 
(i) The resemblances, 10 5 7. 
(ii) The differences between the two: 10 7 14. 

(1) How far the public messes are better regulated in Crete than at 
Sparta. Some other social rules peculiar to the Cretans : ro 7 9. 

(2) How far again the magistracy of the K(XT^OL is worse managed even 
than the ephoralty : 10 914. 

(iii) Nothing but its favourable geographical position has saved Crete 
more than once from the outbreak of mischiefs similar to those at Sparta: 10 
15, i 6. 

(c) Criticism of the Carthaginian polity : c. 11. 

(a) General introductory remarks on the excellence of this polity, its resemblance 
to the Cretan, and more especially to the Spartan polity: n i, 2. 

(/3) Comparison of Carthage and Sparta in respect of the institutions at Carthage 
which correspond to the public mess, the ephoralty, the kingship, and the senate : 
1 1 3, 4- 

(7) To what extent 

(1) the democratical element : 5, 6, 
(ii) the oligarchical element, 

is more strongly represented at Carthage than in Crete or at Sparta 
(r) in the Boards of Five, 1 1 7, 

(2) in the exaggerated respect paid to wealth in the appointment to the 
highest offices, and in the fact that they can be bought a practice mischievous 
to a true aristocracy: n 8 10, i 2, 10 12. 

(5) One defect very usual at Carthage is that the same individual simultaneously 
fills a number of offices : ii 13, 14. 

(e) From many of the evils resulting from the defects of their polity the Cartha 
ginians are preserved solely by external means, placed at their disposal by the insecure 
favour of fortune : n 15, 16. 

(</) Criticism of the Solonian constitution : 12 S 26. 

(a) Transition to this criticism, 12 i. 
((3) There are no good grounds 

(i) either for the praise bestowed by its friends : 12 2, 3, 

(ii) or for the censure bestowed by its opponents: 12 3 6, upon 
Solon s constitution. 



On the most prominent legislators, whether they aimed at founding new polities 
or not : 12 6 14. 

(a) Zaleukos, with remarks upon a supposed school of legislators, Onomakritos, 
Thales, Lycurgus, Zaleukos, Charondas : 12 6, 7. 

({>) Philolaos, 12 8, 

(c) Charondas, 12 8 10, 

(</) Thaleas, 12 ir, 

(<:) Plato, 12 12, 

(/) Draco, 12 13, 

(,<, ) Pittacus, 12 13, 

(//) Andromadas, 12 14.] 


B. III. cc. 113. 

First group: the most general conceptions: III. i i 6 2. 

a. The essential nature of a polity or constitution, of a state, of a 
citizen : cc. i, 2. 

(a) The enquiry into the nature of a constitution raises the question What is a 
state ? and this introduces the further question What is a citizen? : i i, 2. 

(/;) Citizenship is defined by participation in the government of the state, there 
being two forms of this government, the one exercised by the general deliberative and 
judicial bodies, that is, the popular assembly and the jurymen (5i/ca<rra), the other by 
the particular magistrates. Different polities have different regulations as to the 
government, and so too as to the right of participation in it. Citizenship not neces 
sarily dependent on descent from citizens : i 2 2 5. 

II. c. 12 III. c. 6. 109 

/?. The true nature of the state is so largely bound up with its 
constitution that a change in the latter is sufficient to destroy the 
identity of the state, c. 3. 

y. Is the excellence (aperr/) of the citizen the same as the excellence 
of the man ? 4 i 6 2. 

(a) Not unconditionally the same, since 

(i) the former varies with the particular polity, while the latter is always 
one and the same : 4 i 3. 

(ii) It is true that in the highest sense the excellence of the citizen means 
the excellence of a citizen of the best polity. Yet even in the best polity the 
citizens are not all equally good men, although they may be equally excellent in 
their several functions : 4 4, 5. 

[(iii) The state consists of very dissimilar elements, which differ in their 
degrees of excellence : 4 6.] 

(/;) Government in the state must fall to the men who are intellectually and 
morally the most capable. Hence the excellence of the citi/en who rules, i.e. his 
excellence as a ruler, must coincide with his excellence as a man : 4 7 9. 

(() But no one can properly command in the state unless he has first learnt 
properly to obey; this then is a further qualification included under the excellence of 
the ruler, that is, by (/;), under the excellence of the good man. It follows that the 
excellence of the citizen and the excellence of the man are in their inmost nature really 
identical and only apparently distinct (and the best polity that in which they are 
coextensive). The moral excellences (dperai) displayed in ruling and obeying, though 
specifically distinct, are yet generically the same. Only the intellectual or dianoetic 
excellence is generically different in the ruler, where it is higher practical insight and 
prudence, from what it is in the subject, where it is merely right apprehension of the 
command : 4 10 18. 

(d) In agreement with these results the best polity refuses to allow its citizens to 
engage in agriculture or trade, to be artizans or labourers. Men who are thus occu 
pied must have a status assigned them distinct from that of the citizens. In all the 
other polities, true civic excellence, identical with the excellence of the good man, can 
neither wholly nor approximately be attributed to any of the citizens except those who 
are in a position to abstain from such occupations : 5 i 6 2. 

Second group of principles. Development of the chief species of 
particular constitutions, with their order of merit : 6 2 13 25. 

a. Determination of all the possible leading types of polities : 6 

2-7 5- 


(a) A polity or constitution is nothing but a form of government, and the separate 
polities are especially distinguished by the different supreme authorities in whose 
name government is administered. This being so, the difference in polities is mainly 
based upon the observance of the end of the state, and upon the different possible 
modes of ruling men, whether in the interest of the governed, or in the selfish interest 
of the governors. Thus the important distinction is that between normal polities in 
which the government is for the good of the governed and so for the true end of the 
state, the common weal ; that is, the general happiness and the perfecting of life and 
perverted forms : 6 2 u. 

(b) The next subdivision is into three normal constitutions Monarchy, Aristo 
cracy, Polity and three corresponding perversions Tyranny, Oligarchy, Democracy, 
according as the supreme power is vested in one man, in several, or a large number : 
c. 7. 

ft. Closer investigation into the nature of these constitutions and 
their relative values : cc. 8 13. 

(a) Democracy more precisely defined as selfish government by the poor, 
Oligarchy as selfish government by the rich ; the rule of the majority or the 
minority being but a subordinate characteristic, the absence of which, even when 
amounting to a reversal of the numerical proportions, would not affect the 
essential nature of the case : c. 8. 

(b) Which of the normal constitutions is the most normal and the best, and 
what is their order of merit : cc. 9 13. 

(a) The right (St/ccuo?) recognised by the principles of Democracy and of 
Oligarchy respectively, and its divergence in each case from the absolute right 
which is based on excellence (TO Kvpiws 5i/couoj>, TO /car dperrji ) : c. 9. 

(/3) Who ought to be sovereign, judged by the standard of this absolute 
right, and how far his powers should extend : cc. 10, n. 

(i) Objections to the exclusive sovereignty of every class or person: c. 10. 

Not simply of (i) a tyrant, i or (2) the great masses of the poor, 

i, 2 or (3) the rich, 3 ; but also (4) the respectable classes (oi 

e?rtet/<:e?s), 4, or (5) the one best citizen (els 6 ffTrovdaioTaros), 5. 

If however (6) the law is held to be the true sovereign, precisely the same 
questions recur in another form, 5. 

(ii) The true normal state of things : the whole body of citizens relatively so 
virtuous that the merit of the great majority of them taken collectively will exceed that 
of the specially gifted minority. In that case 

(1) sovereignty should be vested in this whole body of citizens, n 
15: but 

(2) its exercise restricted to legislative and judicial powers, more particu 
larly the election and control of the responsible magistrates, to whom the 

III. cc. 613. I I I 

citizens should entrust the details of state business : 1 1 6 9. 

(iii) First objection to this arrangement, u 10 12, and reply to the objection, 
" 13, 14- 

(iv) Second objection, n 15, 16: how disposed of, 16, 17. 

(v) Under this arrangement the law must undoubtedly be the truly supreme 
sovereign : the unrestricted plenary powers of the human sovereign being exercised 
only in the province of the particular and individual which law by its very nature 
cannot define. The more precise character of the laws must in each case be deter 
mined by the constitution : n 1921. 

(7) True constitutional principles more precisely elaborated : cc. 12, 13*. 

(i) A claim to political privilege not conferred by all personal advantages, but 
only by those which are necessarily connected with the essential nature of a state, viz. 
free birth, wealth, and more especially merit (aperr) = capacity and virtue): to which 
may be added nobility, as being a higher degree of free birth and a combination of 
excellence with affluence: c. 12. Polities where the case is otherwise, are no normal 
forms but mere perversions, 1 3 i . 

Fuller statement of the claims justified, 13 2 5. 

(ii) None of the advantages mentioned can lay exclusive claim to justification 
even from the one-sided oligarchical or democratical point of view, much less from 
that of the true aristocracy, as even in respect of merit it is always a question 
whether the excellence of the pre-eminently good men is or is not outweighed by the 
aggregate endowments of the great majority : 13 7 10. 

(iii) If it be so outweighed there is a solution of the difficult 
question, whether the laws should be made for the advantage of the 
majority or of the better men: 13 u, 12. 

(iv) This case also provides for 

(1) the normal and best polity proper, True Aristocracy: 

(2) a Polity, where distinctions of property are also regarded, 
will be the utmost attainable in other cases. This whole discussion, 
(i) and (2), or something similar, is lost. 

(3) In general, the superior merit of a body of men within the state can 
only establish its right when this body is large enough numerically to form a 
state of itself, or at all events to appoint the magistrates, 1 3 6. When it is 
a single citizen, or a few, whose preeminent endowments outweigh those of all 
the rest collectively, perverted forms of government resort to ostracism and 
other violent measures to remove such men and get rid of them, but in the 
best constitution nothing remains except to give them unlimited authority un 
fettered even by law. In such a case the best constitution would take the form 
of Absolute Monarchy: 13 13 25. 

1 [Bernays supposed cc. 12, 13 to be another version of cc. 9 u : see Introd. 
p. 42.] 

I 12 


B. III. c. 14 VIII (V). 

A. Monarchy and the best constitution in the strict sense, Pure 
Aristocracy : III. c. 14-V (VIII). 

MONARCHY: III. cc. 14 18. 

(a) The questions which come under consideration in the examina 
tion of Monarchy: 14 i, 2 (Sia<opas). 

(b) The different varieties of monarchy or kingship : 1 4 2 (paSiov . . . ) 

(a) The office of the Spartan kings; i 5. 

(j8) Despotic monarchy amongst non-Hellenic races; 6, 7. 

(7) A iffv/j.vr)Teia or elective tyranny; 8 10. 

(5) The Hellenic kingship of the heroic age; n 13. 
Recapitulation of these four varieties, 14. 

(t) True absolute monarchy, with full powers, 15. 

(c) Why it is only absolute monarchy that requires fuller considera 
tion in this place: 15 i 3. 

(d) Objections to its utility: 15^3 16. 

(a) In general it is better to be governed by ihe best laws than by the best man: 
15 3 5 (jraaav) : if> 5 (6 ovv] 9. 

(/3) It may be granted that there certainly is one province, that of particular fact, 
for which the decision of the laws is insufficient; yet it is always a question whether it 
is better that in this province the one best man or the whole body of capable citizens 
should have the decision in its own hands: 

15 5 (aXX iffus . . . KaXXiov) : 16 4 (aXXd /u,rji> 6 cra ...) 5: 15 6: 
15 7 10, 16 9 (dXXa, IM]V ou5e...) 10= 16 10 (eiai 5e) 13 : 
15 10 (ei dr]) 13 

(i) Many questions are more correctly decided by the great majority than 
by an individual: 15 5 (oXX tVws...) 7, and many eyes see more than two: 
1 6 10 (clfflSt) 12. 

(ii) A large majority of men of comparative excellence cannot be so easily 
led astray by personal feelings ; 15 8 10. 

(iii) As it is the custom for monarchs to associate their friends with them 
in power, they themselves ipso facto allow the claim of those who are equal and 
alike to an equal share in the government; 16 12, 13. 

III. c. 14 IV. c. i. 113 

(iv) Even a monarch cannot be sole ruler; a number of officials is always 
required. If so, it is better from the first not to have a monarchy but to appoint 
this number of ruling officials by the constitution : 16 10. 

(v) If the absolute rule of a single ruler can only be justified on the ground 
of merit, several capable men have in general more capacity than one : 16 1 1. 

(vi) Historical appendix on the development of the remaining constitutions 
out of monarchy: 15 u 13 (Sr]/j.oKpaTiai>). 

(7) What opinion should be held of hereditary succession to the throne? 15 
3, 14- 

(<5) And of the armed force or body-guard to be assigned to a king? 15 14 
5 dvoplav) 16 2 (j3a<ri\vs). 

(i) This question can easily be settled in a monarchy limited by law: 15 

(ii) Here, however, we are discussing absolute, not limited, monarchy: 16 
i, 2. 

(e) The unrestrained rule of one man over all the rest for his whole lifetime 
appears unnatural when these others are more or less his equals : whereas the only 
normal course appears to be to divide the government amongst several men under the 
restrictions imposed by the laws : 16 2 (SoKei 34 rio-iv) 4. 

(e) How far these doubts and objections are well grounded: c. 17. 

(a) Monarchy not in itself unnatural any more than the rule of a master over 
slaves (Seo-TToreta) or a normal republican government (TroAireta) ; under changed con 
ditions each of them becomes appropriate: 17 i. 

(j3) In fact, however, as an actual form of government in the developed state, 
kingly rule is only conceivable as an absolute monarchy under the most capable citizen ; 
yet not actually suitable and natural save in a single exceptional case, namely, in the 
state of things explained above (c. 13 13 -25): 17 2. 

(y) [Monarchy, Aristocracy, Polity severally adapted to citizens of different kinds: 
17 3, 4.] It is only in the single case above-mentioned that Absolute Monarchy 
should supersede Aristocracy: 17 5 8. 

(f) Transition from Monarchy to the best constitution in the stricter 
sense: c. 18. 


Preliminary Questions : IV (VII) cc. 13. 

(a) The best form of polity is that which is auxiliary to the best and most desira 
ble life. A definition of the latter is thus required and first obtained: i i 10. 
This best life or happiness is shown to be the same for the individual and for the state : 

I II, 12 = 2 I, 2. 

Summary of the results of this investigation : i 13, 14. 
H. 8 


[(/3) A second preliminary question. Even if happiness is made to depend pre 
eminently upon virtue and excellence, we may yet be in doubt whether excellence in 
peace or in war is the main thing for the state, whether the active life of the practical 
statesman or the contemplative life of the scientific enquirer is the happier for the 
individual : 2 3 3 10. 

(i) Excellence of the internal administration is the main thing for the state: 
military excellence is only needed for self-defence and for acquiring as slaves 
those for whom nature intended this lot. The state should not make conquest 
and subjugation its aim and end: 2 8 18. 

(ii) For the individual it is not the tyrant s life but active employment in 
the service of a free and capable state that is alone a great or noble thing. Yet 
the scientific life is no less an active life, and is besides an activity of a higher 
order than the other: c. 3.] 

B. IV (VII) c. 4 V (VIII) c. 7. 

(a) The External Conditions: IV (VII) cc. 412. 

(i) The natural conditions; the land and the people : cc. 4 7. 

(A) Prefatory remarks : 4 i 3. 

(B) Of the proper number of citizens and inhabitants : 4 4 14. 

(c) Of the character and extent of the territory and of its geographical 
form: 5 i 3. 

(D) The position of the city, 5 3 (TTJS dt TroAews...) 6 8, 

(a) on the land side: 5 3, 4, 

(b) towards the sea; 6 i 5. 

Of the regulation of the naval force: 6 6 8. 

(E) The best natural endowment and disposition for the citizens: c. 7. 

(ii) The social or socio-political conditions : cc. 8 12. 

(A) Exclusion of the citizens from work for a livelihood, and of all who 
work for a livelihood from citizenship : c. 8 10 8. 

(a) Distinction between the classes which are actual organic members of the 
state, and such as are merely indispensable conditions for the existence of the former : 
8 i, 2 ; 4 , 5 ; 3, 4. 

(/;) Enumeration of the classes indispensable to the state, 8 6 9. 

(c) It is a feature of the best polity that only the classes which are from the 
nature of the case members of the state, viz. fighting- men and administrators (including 
those who administer justice), with the addition of the priests, who form a third, 
peculiar element, are in fact recognised as its members, or have the citizenship. 
These functions are exercised by them alone, the first in their youth, the second in 
their mature age, and the third when they are old men. All other classes farmers, 
artizans, tradesmen, etc. are excluded from citizenship. Hence every such employ- 

IV. cc. 213. I 15 

ment, even agriculture, is prohibited to the citizens, yet so that the soil belongs to them, 
although it is cultivated by serfs or dependents (8ov\oi 77 ireptotKoi) of non-Hellenic 
descent : c. 9. 

[(</) vSuch regulations are no mere innovation ; they are of old standing in 
Egypt and Crete, as also are public messes in Italy and Crete : 10 r 9.] 

(B) The proper scheme for dividing the land : the right qualifications and 
position of those who cultivate it : 10 9 (irepl 5...) 14. 

(a) General leading principles : 10 9, 10. 

(1) No community of property, only a certain common use granted out of 
friendship, 9 ; 

(2) No citizen to be in want, 9 : 

(3) The common messes to be provided at the public expense, 10. 

(4) So also the worship of the gods, ro. 

(b) The territory is accordingly divided into public land and private land, and 
each of these again into two parts: ro n, 12. 

(<) The cultivators of the soil should be either (i) serfs of different races and of 
docile temper (^77 tfi^oeiSets), those on the state domain to belong to the state, those 
on private estates to the private owners : or failing this, (2) dependent subjects 
of similar temper and of non- Hellenic descent: 10 13, 14. 

(c) Regulations for the building of the city and the hamlets and villages : 

CC. II, 2. 

(a) The city: n 112 7. 

(1) Its site, on the slope of a hill, if possible, facing the east or else the south : 
It ML 9. 

(2) Provision for a perennial supply of sufficient wholesome water, n 3 5. 

(3) Of fortified positions inside the city : 1 1 5. 

(4) Plan for laying out the streets : 1 1 6, 7. 

(5) The walls, u 812. Plan of sites in the walls where the guards may 
hold their mess, 12 i. 

(6) The Upper Market-place, a public square for freemen (dyopa tXevOtpa) with 
the principal temples and the gymnasia for the older men, 12 2 5. The Market 
place for trade and in it the law courts and official buildings : 12 6, 7. 

(b) Public buildings in the country : 1 2 8. 

08) A detailed sketch of the internal working of the Best Polity : 
IV (VII) C. 13 V (VIII) c. 7 (incomplete]. 

(i) General introductory remarks: iv (vn) c. 13. 

(A) A right knowledge of the end of the best polity is as necessary as of the 
means which actually conduce to it : 13 i, 2. 



(B) Its end Is the happiness or well-being of all the citizens, which mainly 
consists in their highest excellence, though this is impossible apart from favourable 
external conditions, under which alone such excellence can be fully realized : 13 3, 4. 
These favourable conditions assumed to be at the legislator s disposal include, besides 
those already discussed, a happy natural capacity on the part of the citizens (0wris), 
whilst the concern and principal task of the legislator is to see how this capacity 
can be improved into actual excellence by habituation and instruction : 13 5 13. 

(ii) The Education of the citizens : IV (VII) c. 14 V (VIII) c. 7 (left 


Its unity : iv (vn) : 14 i 8. 

Its aim and end : 14 9 15 6. 

The means to be employed : iv (vn) 6 end of v (vm). 

(A) Should the education of the rulers and of the ruled be different 
or the same, on the principles of the best constitution? 

Different, in so far as the two are here different persons : the same, 
in so far again as they are the same persons but at different ages, and as 
in a government exercised for the common good of the ruled it is not 
possible to govern well unless one has learnt to obey well : 14 i 8. 

(B) At what should the education of the citizens aim ? What is 
the distinctive end and object of a virtuous life ? 14 9 15 6. 

(1) The virtues of the non-rational part of the soul (the moral virtues) are 
inferior to those of the rational part (the mental excellences or intellectual virtues) 
and have their end in the latter just as work has its end in leisure, war in peace : 
14 9 J 4- 

(2) Hence appears the defectiveness of constitutions like the Spartan, which, 
conversely, make war and conquest the object of the state, and strive solely to 
educate the citizens to be good soldiers, and nothing more, instead of treating military 
excellence as only a means to an end : 14 15, 16. Besides 

(i) such principles have already been refuted by experience, namely by the 
sudden and lamentable collapse of the Spartan state and its power : 14 17. 

(ii) Such principles aiming at the subjugation of other states imply the 
perverse opinion that it is nobler to rule over slaves than over freemen : 
14 1 8, 19. 

(iii) They are also dangerous in their influence on the behaviour of the 
citizens towards their own state : 14 19 (n) 21 (wdpwirwv). 

(iv) What are the ends for which alone war must be waged and citizens 
become good soldiers : 14 21 (T-TIV Te...dov\eveiv). 

(v) Another appeal to experience ; states which have not learned to excel 
in the arts of peace must necessarily fall as soon as they have acquired their 
empire : 14 22. 

IV. cc. 1316. 117 

(3) The virtues of peace and of leisure must rather have the preeminence; all 
the others ought however to be practised, since without the means the end cannot be 
attained and many indispensable virtues are easier to practise in war than in peace. 
For undisturbed peace easily leads us to rank external goods above virtue. But on 
the other hand this same mistake is the foundation for a onesided military tendency 
as, for instance, amongst the Spartans : even capacity in war, which is all they strive 
to attain, is only a means to an end, to the complete acquisition of external goods : 

(c) The right educational means: 15 6 (<on>...) end of 
B. v (vui). 

(a) Preliminary remarks on the right course of education in general and the 
order of succession of educational agencies. Bodily development must precede that 
of the mind ; in the latter, again, the training of the irrational soul by habituation 
must precede that of the rational soul through instruction : yet in such a way that the 
former always regards the latter as its aim and end : 15 6 10. 

(b) Means to be employed before birth ; the care requisite for the 
procreation of children of mental and bodily vigour and of good 
capacity : c. 16. 

(1) The proper age for marriage : i6i 10. 

(i) The leading principles which determine it : 16 2 4, 6 8. 

(a) The difference of age between the parents to be such that their powers of 
procreation do not cease disproportionately, 2. 

(/3) The difference in age between parents and children not to be too great or too 
small, 3. 

(7) The educational requirement above mentioned, that the children to be 
brought up must be physically strong, 4 (...fiov\Ti<ju>). Whereas the offspring of 
marriages between those who are too young is usually stunted, 6. 

(5) Further, young mothers invariably suffer greatly in childbirth, 7 : and 

(e) cohabitation begun at too early an age is prejudicial to female morality : also 

(f) it stunts the growth of the husbands, 8. 

(ii) All these considerations may be satisfied by observing the limits of age 
within which married people are capable of having children, 16 4, 5, and 
thus we arrive at the proper determination, viz. 37(?) for men and 18 for 
women : 16 9, 10. 

(2) The season of the year and appropriate weather for entrance upon marriage 
and its duties: 16 10, n. 

(3) The right bodily condition for the parents : 16 12, 13. 

(4) Provision for the proper treatment of women with child : 16 14. 

(5) Exposure of deformed infants : procurement of abortion to be sanctioned, in 
order that the prescribed number of children may not be exceeded : 16 15. 


(6) Further a limit of age should be set beyond which parents are not to have 
children : this limit prescribed. Procurement of abortion when conception takes 
place beyond this age : 16 16, 17. 

(7) Penalty for adultery : 16 17 (o><rre...) 18. 

(c) Means to be employed directly after birth, 17 i 14. 

(1) In infancy, i 3, 6, 4 . 

(2) In the subsequent period to the fifth year, 4 (rriv 5 ^A^ 7 ?"---) 7- 

With a preliminary discussion of the question how far all coarseness and indecency is 
to be proscribed, and on the other hand how far male adults should be allowed to be 
spectators at comedies and the like : 7 14, 13, 14, 12. 

(3) Education from the fifth year on to the seventh: 14 (die$e\0&i>Twi>...avTOvs). 

(d) The course of Public Education proper from the age of seven 
to that of twenty-one : iv (vn). 17 15, 16, v (vm). 

(1) General introductory remarks. Two grades of age distinguished. State 
ment of the three questions to be discussed in regard to this course of education 
proper: iv (vn). 17, 15, 16. 

(2) It is more than necessary, it is most essential for the best polity, that a definite 
regulation of this educational course should be prescribed by law : v (vm). i r, 2. 

(3) It is not to be a domestic private education : it must be a universal and 
public course : i 3, 4. 

(4) The right educational course : v (vm). cc. 27. 

(i) Fundamental considerations : 2 i 3 12. 

(a) Difference of views both as to the subjects of instruction, and as to the end 
and aim of the training: where there is agreement as to the subjects there are 
divergent views as to their practical application and mode of treatment, due to the 
difference of opinion as to their end : 2 i, 2. 

(P) The pupils must indeed be taught what is indispensable for external life, yet 
here the right limits should be observed. The educational means usually employed 
should not be used (as, music alone excepted, they all may) with the idea of their con 
ferring a purely practical external utility. They ought rather to be regarded as simply 
the conditions to the attainment of a higher end : 2 36. 

(7) The list of these subjects of ordinary education : reading, writing and 
arithmetic, gymnastic exercises, drawing, music : 3 i. 

(5) The ultimate end of education is the right occupation of the highest and 
truest leisure, which is not merely an interlude to work, but in itself the highest goal 
of life. Amusement and pastime serve as recreation to fill the less exalted leisure : 
but for the higher leisure the mind requires a different kind of activity, bringing with 
it the enjoyment of the highest intellectual gratification. Preliminary proof that 
amongst the ordinary subjects taught, music even in the judgment of our ancestors 
tends to this end, 3 2 n (S^Xov) ; and that the other subjects should be so used as 
not to lead away from it, but, indirectly at least, to conduce to it : 3 1 1 (frt 5t) 12. 

IV. c. 1 6 V. c. 6. IIQ 

(ii) Athletic exercises (<TTiK^) : cc. 3 13 4 9. 

(a) As was stated above, IV (vn). 15 6 10, education must begin with bodily 
exercises: 3 13. 

(/3) But two errors should be avoided ; the one, of training up the boys like 
athletes, as is commonly done ; the other, the Spartan practice of brutalizing them by 
excessive exertions : 4 r 7. 

(7) We must therefore begin with easier exercises for the first period, and wait 
until they have attained puberty, and have been taught the other subjects of instruc 
tion for three years, before we commence the more exhausting gymnastic training : 
4 7 (on & oiV) 9. 

(iii) Music : cc. 5 7. 

(a) Statement of the question : Should music serve for pastime recreation 
and relaxation, or for moral training, or lastly as a purely aesthetic and theoretic 
enjoyment, thereby ministering to the highest intellectual gratification? 5 i 4 

(/3) The first and third of these ends are to all appearance foreign to the 
education of youth, though something may be said in favour of taking notice of them 
too in connexion with it. But it is still a question whether for any of these three 
objects it is necessary to learn to be a practical musician oneself: 5 4 (on /ui> 
ovv) 8. 

(7) Answer to the first question : Music can and should subserve each of those 
three aims, not only the highest intellectual gratification, but also mere recreation, 
since it is a thoroughly innocent enjoyment ; and considering the frequent need for 
recreation in life this alone would suffice to justify its admission to a place in the 
instruction of youth. This consideration is not then to be wholly disallowed, as we 
supposed above (4): yet it is only subordinate, 5 9 15: and the main point 
is that music is, thirdly, an excellent means for the moral training of the young : 
5 1625. 

(5) From this follows the answer to the second question : 

(i) that in general the young should in fact be taught to become practical 
musicians : 6 1,2. 

(n) and yet the adult citizens of the best state have in general to refrain 
from practising music themselves : 3, 4. 

(ill) Further this musical instruction should be regulated, 5, 6, as 
follows : 

(a) With regard to the degree of proficiency to be attained, the pupils 
should not be trained up to be professional virtuosi, but only receive the 
needful training of their characters and their tastes : 6 6 (<pavepbv...) 8. 

(b) For this reason all musical instruments, like the flute, which are 
only in use with professional performers, should be excluded from the in 
struction of the young : 6 916. 


(c) Lastly, as to the various modes (dpfJLOvlat} and rhythms : 

(1) for musical performances by professional musicians all modes 
are permissible, since all serve to promote the homoeopathic purification of 
the emotions which procures the educated the highest intellectual grati 
fication and the multitude recreation and amusement. Hence for the 
sake of the public at large who are not citizens the farmers, artisans, 
labourers at such performances even the modes and pieces which gratify 
their low taste must be admitted. But for the moral training of the young 
only those which best represent, and for that reason best train, character, 
the Dorian mode especially. The Phrygian mode should not be allowed : 
7 3 I2 - [Perhaps however the Lydian mode may be tolerated, since 
we are not excluded from paying some regard to the amusement of a maturer 
age, and even adult citizens are on certain occasions allowed to sing : also 
the modes which are appropriate to the compass of the voice in mature 
life may be allowed as well as those specially adapted to the yo-ung: 
7 I315-] 

(2) The elucidation of the further question stated in 7 2, whether 
the rhythm or the melody and tune is of chief importance for the instruction 
of the young, is altogether wanting. 


Introductory remarks: B. VI (IV) cc. 1, 2. 

i. Why it belongs to political philosophy to consider not merely the absolutely 
best constitution, but also the best on the average, the best in any given case, and 
even the best possible organization of any actually existing polity : i i 7. 

ii. This implies an exact acquaintance with all possible forms of government, 
and therefore with all the possible varieties of Democracy, Oligarchy, etc., which up 
till now have been left out of sight : i 8. 

iii. The theory of legislation moreover is based upon this exact acquaintance 
with constitutions : i 9 n. 

iv. The department of constitutional theory which remains for treatment de 
fined : i i. Order of merit of the degenerate forms of government : 2 2, 3. 
The arrangement to be followed in the succeeding exposition : 2 4 6. 

The actual details of the theory of the established constitutions : 
vi (iv). c. 3 vin (v). 

i Enumeration of all possible constitutions : VI (IV) cc. 310. 

[(i) The difference between polities depends on the extent to 
which different classes take part in the government, c. 3. 

V. c. 7 VI. c. 12. 121 

(n) How Democracy and Oligarchy ought rightly to be de 
fined : 4 i6. 

(in) The explanation of the fact that Oligarchy and Democracy 
come to be regarded as almost the only constitutions. Why there 
are more than these two and their sub-species. The classes of 
people necessary in the state : 4 7 19.] 

(iv) The different species of Democracy and Oligarchy : 
4 206 ii. 

(a) The basis of the general difference between them, 4 20, 21 (...8ta<f>opai>). 

(b) Enumeration of the four kinds of Democracy from the best, which resembles 
Polity, down to the worst or unrestrained Democracy, which resembles Tyranny : 
4 22 (8woKpa.Tla)% 31. 

(c) Enumeration of the four kinds of Oligarchy in corresponding manner, from 
the most moderate to that which resembles Tyranny, viz. arbitrary dynastic govern 
ment (dwaffreia) : 5 i, 2. 

(d) In spite of a constitution externally oligarchical a state may nevertheless 
bear a democratic character, and conversely : 5 3, 4. 

(e) Reasons assigned why there can only be these four species (a) of Democracy, 
6 i6, (j8) of Oligarchy, 6 7 n. 

(v) The different species of Mixed Aristocracy and the forms 
of Polity: c. 79 5, 12 4, 12 613 6, 9 6 10, 
13 7 ii. 

(a) Of Aristocracy and Polity in general: 7 I 4. 

(b) The species of Mixed Aristocracy : 7 4, 5. 

(c) Of Polity : c. 8, 9 15, 12 4, 12 613 6, 9 6 10, 13 711. 

(a) Justification of the arrangement by which Polity is reserved for treat 
ment to this point and Tyranny comes last of all : 8 i, 2. 

(/3) A further and more exact distinction between Polity and the Mixed 
Aristocracies. Refutation of the view that those species and varieties of Polity 
which incline more to Oligarchy than to Democracy should be included under 
Mixed Aristocracies, 8 3 9. 

(7) Genesis and organization of Polity : 9 i 5, 12 4, 12 6 13 6, 
9 6 10, 13 7 ii. 

(i) The three different ways of fusing Democracy and Oligarchy in Polity, 
9 I 5- ( u ) The middle class as the proper support of Polity, 12 4. 

(iii) On the degree of success in the fusion depends the durability of the Polity. 
When therefore Polities or Mixed Aristocracies are established, it is a grave mistake 
if out of favour to the rich the claims of the poor are only satisfied in appearance, the 
concession made to them being in reality annulled and rendered void by all kinds of 


illusory devices. Enumeration of such illusory measures and of the similar counter- 
measures adopted in democracies with the opposite intent : 12 6 13 6. 
(iv) The criterion of a successful fusion in Polity, also in Mixed Aristocracy, 
2 6 IO . ( v ) The amount at which the property qualification for the fran 

chise should be fixed, 13 7 9 (iro\e/4eti>). (vi) Peculiar constitution of certain 

individual Polities, 13 9. (vii) Historical remarks : 13 10, n. 

(vi) The different species of Tyranny, c. 10. 

ii The best constitution on the average 

TroXecri) I C. 11. 

(i) This is, in the main, Polity, as the rule of the well-to-do 
middle class : n i, 2. 

For (a) as in the life of the individual moral virtue and excellence consist in the 
right mean between two opposite extremes of error, so the life of the state prospers 
best when the well-to-do middle class has the preponderance, whereas the extremes of 
wealth and poverty are two main sources of the two opposite kinds of crime and 
wrong-doing : n 35. 

(b) Excessive wealth leads to despotic ambition, extreme poverty to servile 
submission: n 6 

(c) The middle class has the most assured existence ; the more strongly it is 
represented in the state, the more the state is secured from insurrection and internal 
troubles and from the danger of degenerating into one of the three worst perversions 
or degenerate types of polity, extreme Democracy, extreme Oligarchy, or Tyranny : 
n 8 (/cat cryfovTai) 13. This accounts for the fact that Democracies are ordina 
rily more stable than Oligarchies, because in the former the middle class is usually 
more numerous and influential than in the latter, 11 14. 

(d) The best legislators have come from the middle class, n 15. 

(n) All this explains why Polity, although the constitution best 
adapted for most states, is yet of rare occurrence : n 16 19. 

(a) It frequently happens that the middle class in a state is not very numerous, 
ir 16. 

(b) In the frequent party conflicts between rich and poor it is invariably the 
practice for the victorious side to seize the government for itself, and not to come to 
terms with the defeated side, n 17. 

(c) Of the two states that were in succession supreme in Greece, the one, 
Athens, introduced democracies and the other, Sparta, oligarchies, each in her own 
interest : n 18, 19. 

(in) The nearer any one of the remaining constitutions stands 
to that which is the best on the average, the better it is : the 
further it is removed therefrom, the worse it is : n 20, 21. 

VI. CC. 12 15. 123 

iii What kind of polity is relatively the best for different kinds of 

people (ris TroXireia riVt KCU Troia TTOIOIS (rv^fpa): 12 1 3, 4 (orrov . ) 

(i) General positions laid down, 12 i, 2. 

(ii) Their application (a) to Democracy and its different species, 12 3, 
(b) to Oligarchy and its different species, 12 3 (OTTOU...), (c) to Polity, 12 4 

(OTTOV St...) 5, (d) to so-called or Mixed Aristocracy (this is wanting}. 

Recapitulation of all the previous discussion, 13 12. 

iv The theory of the best possible organization of the different 
Democracies and Oligarchies, or of that which most corresponds to the 
spirit and intent of each of them respectively : VI (IV). 14 VII (VI). 

(i) General fundamental positions as to the ordering and 
organization of all possible polities : vi (iv). cc. 14 16. 

(a) Distinction of the Deliberative, Executive, and Judicial authorities in the 
state : 14 i, 2. 

(b) Organization of the Consultative or Deliberative body in accordance with 
the various polities : 14 3 15. 

(a) The department of the Deliberative authority, and the three possibilities that 
either the whole body of citizens, or particular magistrates, have to decide upon all 
that belongs to this department, or again that it is divided between the one and the 
other: 14 3. 

(/3) These three possible cases, the different forms under which they may 
appear in practical application, and the sphere of action (whether larger or smaller) 
assigned to the different deciding factors, how distributed amongst different polities : 
i 4 4 -io; 

(i) amongst the different species of Democracy, 14 4 7 (Trdvrej) ; 

(ii) those of Oligarchy, 14 7 (r6 5^ TIVO.S...) 9 ; 

(iii) Mixed Aristocracy, 14 10 ; 

(iv) Polity inclining to Aristocracy, and Polity proper, 14 10. 

(7) Measures by which at all events to secure that the decrees passed and the 
verdicts of the courts shall be good and salutary for the state, (i) in the most extreme 
Democracy, where all is decided by decrees of the people, through the adoption 
of certain oligarchical elements or of institutions related to Polity, while the demo- 
cratical principle is still retained : and (ii) in an Oligarchy, through the adoption of 
certain democratical institutions or of others peculiar to Polity, or else by a procedure 
the reverse of that usual in Polities : 14 n 16. 

(c) Organization of the Executive power, or the magistracies : c. 15. 

(a) Statement of the questions to be answered in regard to this subject, 15 i, 2. 

(|8) What kind of officials are to be regarded as really magistrates, i.e. as 
ministers or authorities of the state : 15 2 (fan 5...) 4. 


(7) What officials are required for every state, great or small, 15 5 8. 

(5) The distinction between different magistracies according as the nature of the 
department they administer involves its extension over the whole state or its division 
according to definite localities, 15 9 (...rbv auroV), and further according as the same 
department controls all the persons affected by it, or different classes are assigned to 
different magistrates, 15 9 (K 

(e) The difference between magistracies in the various constitutions : 15 10 13. 

(i) Certain offices are the same under different forms of the state, only the 
mode of appointment to them being different, 15 10. 

(ii) Others are generically the same under different forms but specifically 
different : i.e. different as to the extent of their powers, 10. 

(iii) Others again are peculiar to given forms of the state, n 13. 

(f) The different modes of appointing to magistracies and their distribution 
amongst the forms of government, 15 14 21. 

(i) Each of the three questions to be considered, viz. who have the right to 
elect, who are eligible, and what is the mode of election, admits of three possi 
bilities : combine each possibility under the first of these heads with each 
possibility under the second and third severally, and we obtain as the total 
number of conceivable cases nine for each of the three, i.e. 27 in all : 15 

(ii) These modes classified under (A) Democracy 19, (B) Polity, 

not only Polity proper, but also the variety which has an aristocratical, and that 
which has an oligarchical character, 19, 20, (c) Oligarchy 20, 21 

and (D) Mixed Aristocracy 21. 

(77) The duties of its department must determine what mode of appointment is 
advantageous for each office, 15 22. 

(d) Organization of the judicial authority ; c. 16. 

(a) Statement of the questions to be answered in regard to this subject, 16 i. 

(ft) The different kinds of courts, 16 25. 

(7) The possible differences between them as to who are eligible as jurors (ot 
SiKafrvres) ; how they are to be appointed ; whether they are to exercise all possible 
judicial functions or only to serve in certain courts, 16 6, 7. 

(<5) Classification of them under the different forms of the state, Democracy, 
Oligarchy, Aristocracy, and Polity, 16 8. 

(ii) Organization of the different species of Democracy and 
Oligarchy : vn (vi) cc. i 7. 

(a) The discussion of this subject announced : the questions which remain as to 
the organization of other constitutions, and as to the blending of different forms when 
one power in the state is regulated in accordance with one form, and another in 
accordance with another form : i r 4. 

VI. c. 15 VII. c. 7. 125 

(b) The species of Democracy : i 5 c. 5. 

(a) Species are distinguished according to the various occupations of the different 
democratic populations, and the degree to which they have severally adopted demo 
cratic institutions: i 5 10. 

(/3) The principles of Democracy enumerated : 2 i 4. 

(7) All the democratic institutions developed from them : 2 5 8. 

[(5) Objections to absolute Democracy and recommendation of a peculiar 
form of compromise between the claims of Democracy and those of Oligarchy : 
2 9-3 6.] 

(e) Organization of the best and most moderate species of Democracy, 4 
. 1-14: 

() of the two intermediate species, 4 15 : and 

(77) of the extreme Democracy, 4 15 (T^V re reAeirrcu cu/ . . .) 5 1 1. 

(i) The institutions which promote the growth of this form: 4 15 20. 

(ii) The measures which tend to neutralize its dangerous effects, and even 
impart to it, so far as is possible, a tolerable and durable character : c. 5* 

(A) Preliminary remark on the urgent need for such measures: 5 r, 2. 

(B) Particular instances of measures of the kind, 5 3 n : 

(a) a diminution in the number of political trials, 5 3, 4 : 

(i) by not distributing the fines amongst the people, (2) by imposing severe 
penalties upon false accusation : 

(b) the practice of summoning few popular assemblies and allowing the 
courts to sit as seldom as possible in the poorer states, 5 5, 6 ; and in the 
richer states of bestowing large sums at rare intervals upon the poor, and freeing 
the richer citizens from useless burdens : 5 7 9. 

(c) Measures taken at Carthage and Tarentum ; 5 9 n. 

(c) The species of Oligarchy : cc. 6, 7. 

(a) Organization of the best and most moderate species of Oligarchy : 6 i, 2 ; 
(|3) of the several intermediate species, 6 3 ; and 
(7) of the most extreme Oligarchy or Dynastic government, 6 3, 4. 
(5) Measures more directly affecting oligarchies at large, 6 5 7 7. 
(i) The principal safeguard of Oligarchy, 6 5. 

(ii) Arrangement as regards the military force and service in the army, 
7 1-3- 

(iii) Individual members of the popular party may be won over to the 
oligarchical government, 7^4. 

(iv) To the highest posts in the government should be attached costly 
burdens to be defrayed for the commonwealth, 7 5 7. 


(in) The theory of the organization of public offices : a fuller 
account in detail, c. 8 (incomplete}. 

(a) The questions to be discussed, 8 i, 2. 

(b) The officials necessary in every state, 8 3... 21. 

Superintendents (a) of the markets (ayopavb^oi), 3, (/3) of the streets, 

public buildings, harbours; the city police (ciaTi/j/o,uoi) 4, 5. (7) Police 

officers in the country (dyp6i>o/j.ot, uAwpot) ; (5) financial officers (curod^Krai, 

Tct/ucu), 6. (e) Keepers of archives and registers (^^oj/ej, ^Trtararai), 

7. () Officers for penal administration, executioners and the like, 8 

13. (rj) Military officers (a-Tparrjyoi, TroX^/xapxot, vavapxoi, KT\), 13 15. 

(0) Board of control, for scrutiny of the accounts of retiring officials (evdvvoi, \oyiffrai, 
cera(TTcu), 1 6. (i) Legislative committee, to summon and direct the popular 

assembly, and to bring matters before it (irpo^ovXoL, /JovX?? ), 17. (K) Officers 

to superintend public worship (te/aets /crX), 18 20. (X) Recapitulation, 


(c) Magistrates peculiar to certain given constitutions, 8 22. 

The theoretical treatment of the cases where different forms of polity 
are combined in one and the same state, is wanting. 

v The causes of decay in the various forms of the state and the 
corresponding safeguards : B. VIII (V). 

i Preliminary Observations: i i 8, 9 n, 8 : 
3 14: i n 16. 

(a) Statement of the whole question : i i. 

(b) The general cause of all internal political disturbances consists in dissension 
as to the extent to which political equality should be carried : the rich and the nobles 
claim special privileges over the poor, the latter on the ground of their free birth claim 
equality with the rich : i 2 7. 

(c) Two species of revolution, i 8 n : 

(a) Overthrow of the constitution, 8 n : whether 
(i) subversion of the entire polity, 8 ; or simply 

(ii) accentuation or relaxation of the same form of government, 9 ; or 
(iii) abolition of single parts of the constitution, 10. 

(j3) Change merely in the holders of power, 8. 

(d) Special application of the remarks in i 2 7 to Democracy and Oligarchy. 
Two kinds of equality distinguished : it is necessary to pay attention to both kinds: 
3 14, i ii (iravraxov...) 15. 

(e) Why Democracy is in general more enduring than Oligarchy, i 16. 

VII. c. 8 VIII. c. 4. 127 

ii The causes of decay inherent in all polities in common : cc. 2 4. 

(a) The three points for general consideration in this inquiry : the tendencies, 
the objects in view, and the external occasions which lead to political revolutions, 


(b) The tendencies and claims which lead to intestine disturbances and to re 
volutions have been already characterized (i 2 7). How far they are justified, or 
not, 2 2, 3. 

(c) The objects sought to be attained in rebellions and insurrections : 2 3 (TTWS 

(d) The definite occasions of revolution : 2 4 3 8, 4 8 12, 3 9 4 7. 

(a) General enumeration : 2 4 6. 

(P) Consideration of them in detail : 3 i 8, 4 812, 3 94 7. 

(i) Insolence in the rulers, 3 i. 

(ii) Their greed for aggrandisement, 3 i. 

(iii) Efforts of the subject body to attain higher political honours, 3 2. 

(iv) Preponderating influence of individuals, 3 3. 

(v) Fear of punishment or of injustice, 3 4. 

(vi) Contempt for the governing class on account of their weakness, 3 5. 

(vii) Disproportionate growth of separate elements in the polity or classes of the 
population, 3 68 ; 4 8 10 : and conversely 

(viii) The establishment of an equivalence in point of numbers between opposing 
elements in the state. 

(ix) Appropriation of offices by electoral intrigues (Sia rots epideias), 3 9. 

(x) Neglect of the dangers threatening the constitution from individuals, 3 9. 

(xi) Gradual introduction of slight changes unobserved, 3 10. 

(xii) Any sort of difference between the inhabitants, 3 ii 13, 15 16. 

As (A) difference in race, particularly when alien settlers have been ad 
mitted, 1113 : 

(B) difference in sentiment, and especially in political sympathies, between 
the dwellers in different localities of one and the same state, due to a dif 
ference of character in the localities, 15, 16. 

(xiii) Private feuds between leading, influential citizens, 4 i 7. 

(e) The means usually employed to effect revolutions, 4 12, 13 : 

(a) force, () stratagem, (7) stratagem succeeded by force. 


in The causes of decay and the corresponding safeguards in the 
particular forms of government: cc. 5 12. 

(a) Positive or dogmatic exposition : c. 5 c. 12 6. 
(a) Republics, cc. 5 9. 

(i) THE CAUSES OF DECAY, cc. 5 7. 
(A) In democracies, c. 5. 

(a) Change to Oligarchy due to the continual persecutions of the rich by the 
demagogues, 5 i 5. 

(6) Change to Tyranny, the demagogues usurping absolute power. Why this 
only happened in former times, why it is no longer usual for tyrannies to arise, 
5 6io, namely, because 

(1) formerly demagogues were also generals, 5 6, 7. 

(2) formerly certain officers had too large powers assigned them, 5 8 

(3) The states were as yet small, and the people in former times busy with 
their occupations in the country, so that it was easier for military chiefs to 
seize absolute power, 5 8, 9. 

(c) Change from the most moderate to the most extreme form of democracy, due 
to the demagogic intrigues of candidates for office, 5 id, n. 

(B) In oligarchies, c. 6. 

(a) Downfall of oligarchies through ill-treatment of the people, 6 i. 

(l>) Downfall through dissensions between the rich oligarchs themselves, 6 2 
9, 1416, 10. 

(1) If the actual members of the oligarchical government are reduced to a 
mere handful, so that even persons belonging to the ruling families are excluded 
from it by law, 6 2 5 2 . 

(2) If the oligarchs themselves from mutual jealousy adopt demagogic 
intrigues, 65 (KLVOVVTO.I....) 7: 

(i) one member of the government, or a minority, intriguing to gain over the 
rest to his support, 6 6 : 

(ii) a part of the oligarchs (or all of them) intriguing with the people, 
6 6, 7 : 

(a) where the people has the right of electing to the public offices, 
6, or if 

(P) the law courts are constituted out of the people, 7, or 
(7) in case some of the oligarchs are aiming at concentrating the power 
of the state in yet fewer hands, 7. 

1 Perhaps (2) should properly follow a small number of oligarchs, in spite of 
(3). good government, can procure the down- 

2 If 5, Kol tv "Epvdpa.?s...Tro\iTia.v, be fall of the oligarchy at the hands of the 
genuine we must add : " In the same way people." 

VIII. cc. 5 7. I 29 

(iii) If individual oligarchs who have squandered their property attempt 
to make a revolution or to enrich themselves from the public means, thus 
embroiling themselves with the government, or raising a popular insurrection 
6 8, 9. 

(iv) If members of the oligarchy are involved in private enmity owing to 
marriage relations or lawsuits, 6 14, 15. 

(v) An oligarchy may be subverted by its own members on account of the 
too despotical character of the government, 6 16. 

Concluding remark : an oligarchy united in itself is not easily overthrown from 
without, 6 10. 

(c) Fall of the old oligarchy by the formation of a new one within it, 6 1 1 l . 

[(d) Overthrow of oligarchies by the generals of mercenary troops enrolled for 
war ; or in time of peace by the generals called in because of the mutual distrust 
of the oligarchs; or by a commander appointed on the same grounds to mediate 
between them, 6 12, 13.] 

(e) Change from Oligarchy to Polity and from Polity to moderate Democracy 
due to a depreciation of money, whereby the property qualification required by law 
for the franchise ceases to be adequate, 6 16, 17. 

(f) Change from one kind of Oligarchy to another : 6 18. 

(c) In Mixed Aristocracies and Polities: c. 7 113. 

(a) Fall of aristocracies and revolutions in consequence of the number of those 
who take part in the government becoming too small, 7 i 4 : 

(i) especially when the large body excluded consider themselves equal in 
merit, 7 i, 2 ; 

or (2) if able and distinguished men are ill-treated by men not superior to 
them in desert although occupying higher offices in the state, 7 2, 3 ; 
or (3) are excluded from the government in spite of their merits, 7 3 ; 
or (4) if some of the citizens are too poor and others too rich, 7 3> 
or (5) an individual is so powerful that he is likely to attain supreme power, 
7 4- 

(l>) The principal danger for Aristocracies of this type and for Polities consists in 
the fact that the oligarchical element in them has not quite successfully blended with 
the democratical element, but the one of these preponderates over the other, 7 5, 6. 
[Consequently a revolution to this preponderating side may easily take place ; that is, 
to complete Oligarchy or Democracy. Sometimes however there is a movement in 
the opposite direction: 7 7 10.] 

(c) Aristocracies of this type are subject, above all other forms of government, to 
dissolution brought on by unperceived gradual changes, 7 11 13. 

(D) Concluding remark on the changes in republics taken in common. 

Sometimes they are of internal origin, sometimes they are brought about by 
powerful foreign states, 7 14. 

1 Perhaps i o, 1 1 should also be enclosed in the square brackets. 
H. 9 


(ii) THE SAFEGUARDS: cc. 8, 9. 

(A) Preliminary remark. 

The safeguards are implied in the statement of the causes of destruction : 8 i. 
(B) Enumeration of the safeguards : 8 2 9 22. 

(a] In Polities and Mixed Aristocracies especial care must be taken that slight 
changes and deviations from the existing laws do not gradually creep in unobserved : 
8 2, 3. 

(b] In the same governments precautions must be taken against those illusory 
measures discussed in vi (iv), 12 6 13 6 : 8 4. 

(c] In Aristocracies and Oligarchies the government must not only treat the 
governed well, but must also treat its own members on a footing of democratic equality, 
8 5 : hence many democratic measures are often quite in place even under these con 
stitutions, 8 6, 7. 

(d] The citizens must be kept in constant vigilance over their constitution, 8 8. 

(e] All disputes between the principal men must as far as possible be avoided and 
prevented; and, so far as this fails, care must be taken that no others but the original 
parties to the quarrel are involved in it, 8 9. 

(/) In Polities and Oligarchies a fresh valuation of property must be taken 
frequently in order that the property qualification for the franchise, if it is to retain 
its relative importance, may undergo the necessary revision at the proper time, 
8 10, ii. 

(g) No citizen to be disproportionately elevated : in particular, provision 
should be made by legislation to prevent the rise of unduly powerful individuals : if 
this does not succeed, they should be removed from the state by ostracism : 8 12. 

(h) There should be a special board of magistrates to have supervision over the 
private lives of the citizens and see that they are in accord with the existing form of 
government, 8 13. 

(i) Care must be taken that one part of the citizens does not prosper at the 
expense of the rest, 8 14 21 ; and hence 

(1) that magisterial offices never fall exclusively into the hands of one of 
the two opposed classes of the population, 8 14: 

(2) that the antagonism between rich and poor is adjusted or else that the 
middle class increases, 8 14: 

(3) especially that the public offices do not afford any opportunity for 
enriching oneself from the public property, 8 15 19. 

(4) In democracies the property of the rich must be spared, 8 20 ; 

(5) in oligarchies posts with emolument attached to them must be assigned 
to the poorer citizens, and the insolence of a rich man towards a poor man must 
be punished more severely than if it were towards another rich man, 8 20. 

(6) Further in oligarchies the accumulation of landed property in the same 
hands must be restrained within limits fixed by law, 8 20, 

VIII. cc. 8io. 131 

(7) Care must be taken in an oligarchy that the decisive authority rests in 
the hands of the rich, and in a democracy that it rests with the poor: but in 
other respects equal, nay even higher, -privileges must be conceded in the former 
case to the poor, and in the latter case to the rich, 8 21. 

(/) It must always be kept in view that attachment to the established form of 
government, special knowledge of the subject, and lastly virtue and integrity are 
requisite for the highest official positions : the second qualification indeed in certain 
offices in a higher degree than the third, in others again the third qualification in a 
higher degree than the second : c. 9 i 4. 

(/) In a word, every measure that helps the healthy working of a constitution 
tends also to preserve it, 9 5. 

(tn) The citizens who desire the continuance of the form of government must be 
the numerical majority, 9 5. 

(n) Even in the worse forms of Democracy and Oligarchy the mean must be pre 
served : it is the exaggeration of democratic and oligarchic measures which infallibly 
leads to the downfall of Democracy and Oligarchy respectively: 9 6 n (5^/wos). 

(o) But the principal thing is to educate the young in the spirit of the established 
form of government: 9 u (idyiarov 5e) 16. 

(/?) Monarchies : c. 10 c. 12 6. 

(i) THE CAUSES OF DECAY: c. 10. 
(A) Discussion of certain fundamental points : 10 1 

(a) The government of a king is closely related to Aristocracy, but Tyranny 
(rvpavvis) combines the evils of the most extreme Democracy and of the most extreme 
Oligarchy: 10 i, 2. 

(b) The opposite nature of kingly rule and tyranny is at once shown in their 
divergent and opposite origin: 10 3 8. 

(c) A more precise statement of the antithesis between them : 10 9, 10. 

(</) The points which Tyranny has in common with Oligarchy on the one hand 
and with Democracy on the other: 10 n 13 (dvaipelv). 

(B) Causes of the overthrow of monarchies and of monarchs in general : 

10 1328. 

(a) General statement 

(i) of the motives for conspiracies and attacks upon a sole ruler, 10 13, 14, 

and (2) of the objects sought thereby, 10 14. 

(3) Some of these attacks are directed against the person of the usurper; in 
others the assailant desires to seize the throne for himself, or to effect a revolution in 
the government : ioi5. 

(b) These points of view presented in detail; 10 15 28. 

(1) Attacks in consequence of injuries received, 10 15 20; 

(2) from fear of punishment, 10 20; 



(3) from contempt for the ruler, 10 22 25 ; 

(4) from greed of gain (largely wanting], 10 25 ; 

(5) from ambition, 10 26 28. 

(c) Special causes of the downfall of (a) tyrants and tyrannies, (to) of kings and 
kingships: 10 29 38. 

(a) Tyrants and tyrannies : 10 29 34. 

(1) A tyranny is destroyed from without by more powerful foreign states not 
tyrannies whether (i) under a royal or aristocratical, or (li) under a democratical 
government, 10 29, 30. 

(2) It is ruined from within by the members of the ruling family quarreling 
amongst themselves, 10 31. 

(3) Most tyrants make themselves despised and this most frequently brings about 
their fall, 10 32, 33. 

(4) Again, every tyrant is necessarily hated ; hatred and righteous indignation 
against him often accomplish his overthrow, 10 33, 34. 

(5) The same causes which threaten Extreme Democracy and Extreme Oligarchy 
are also dangerous to Tyranny: 10 35. 

(/>) The government of a king (as distinct from a tyrant) is mostly destroyed 
from within. 

Either (i) feuds break out between members of the royal family, 10 36: or 

(2) the kings overstep the legitimate limits of their authority and aim at making 
themselves tyrants, 10 38. 

(3) Under an hereditary monarchy it is often impossible to prevent the succession 
to the throne of princes who render themselves contemptible, 10 38, 

or (4) to exclude others who behave with insolence and violence, forgetting that 
they are not tyrants but kings, 10 38. 

(5) Why it is that even in recent times tyrannies have sprung up, but no new 
monarchies arise, 10 37. 

(ii) THE SAFEGUARDS : c. n, c. 12 i 6. 

(A) The office of king is best preserved by the gradual diminution of its absolute 
authority in keeping with the spirit of the times, n I 3. 

(B) The tyrant can only secure his throne, n 4 34, 

(a) by employing the most extreme measures of force and corruption, 1 1 4 16: 

(1) by getting rid of all the principal men, entirely forbidding the common pur 
suit of culture, and putting down all messes and clubs, 1 1 4, 5 : 

(2) by compelling all the citizens to live in public, n 6, 

and (3) by imitating all the other regulations of Persian and other oriental despot 
isms, ii 6: 

(4 ) by sending secret spies and detectives amongst the citizens, 1 1 7 ; 

(5) by setting all classes of the population against one another, ii 8; 

VIII. cc. 10, ii. 133 

(6) draining the means of all his subjects, u 9, 10, 
and (7) perpetually creating wars, u 10, 

(8) by suspecting his own friends most of all, n 10, 

(9) by allowing families to be governed by women and by giving slaves license 
to indulge all their caprices, just as in the most extreme democracy, n n, 12 ; 

(10) by permitting no dignified or free-minded character to remain near him, 
ii 13; 

(n) by being more intimate with strangers than with his own townsmen, n 14. 
(12) The three leading points of view in this policy, n 15, 16. 

Or (b) by demagogic devices joined with activity in war, when the tyrant poses as 
the friend of the people and makes his usurped power approximate to that of a king, 
1 1 i7 34- 

(1) Careful management of the state funds ; avoidance of lavish grants to mistresses, 
foreigners, or artists ; a statement of accounts presented ; no treasures accumulated for 
himself, ii 19 21. 

(2) He should endeavour to create the impression that all taxes paid and services 
rendered are not for him but for the state, ii 21. 

(3) He must inspire reverence by a dignified bearing and by capacity in war, 
instead of inspiring fear by severity and rough treatment, ii 22. 

(4) He should not merely himself avoid crimes and offences against his subjects, 
but he should not allow them to be committed by any of his family or court, especi 
ally those who are of the female sex, ii 22, 23. 

(5) He should be moderate in his indulgences, or at least should conceal his 
excesses from the world, n 23, 24. 

(6) In his care for the adornment of the capital he must not seem to have any 
ulterior object, 1 1 24. 

(7) He should create the impression that though he is free from childish super 
stition yet he is very specially concerned to honour the gods, ii 25. 

(8) He must award, to those who show themselves deserving, higher honours and 
distinctions than they could hope for in a free state, and he must always bestow dis 
tinctions and rewards himself, but have punishments inflicted and executed by others, 
ii 26. 

(9) On the other hand, like monarchs generally, he should especially avoid 
raising individuals to greatness, least of all a man of bold and enterprising character, 
ii 27. 

(10) Of all deeds of violence, personal insults or ill treatment, and seduction 
accomplished by force are the most dangerous. If he cannot altogether avoid them, 
he should give to the former the colour of paternal chastisement, and seek to succeed 
in his intrigues by dint of impassioned persuasion alone, n 28, 29. 

(n) He should especially be on his guard against people who imagine that they, 
or some one whom they love, have been so deeply wronged by him that they are ready 
to hazard their lives in opposing him, 1 1 30. 

(12) While he should seek to please rich and poor alike, he should yet prefer to 
rest his rule upon the poor where they are the stronger, but where the rich have the 
upper hand, upon the rich, n 31, 32. 


(13) The leading points in this whole policy, and the great advantages which 
attend on it, n 33, 34. 

[(c) Oligarchy and Tyranny the least enduring forms of government. Historical 
survey of the tyrannies which lasted the longest, with the reasons why this was the 
case : 12 i 6.] 

(b) Criticism of Plato s doctrine 

of the successive changes from one form of the state to the other : 
i27 18. 

(a) His theory of the transition from the best form of polity to the 
remaining forms : 12 7 10. 

(i) It takes the right point of view for the cause of the decline in the best form; 
but the explanation given of the appearance of this cause is 

(A) not peculiar to the best form of the state, but applies to all human affairs 
in common, 12 8, and 

(15) supposing the best form of government to have been introduced into 
different states at different times before the period which Plato assumes for the 
universal decline, it is scarcely conceivable that, on the approach of this period, 
it would be subverted at one and the same time in them all, 12 9, 10. 

(ii) No reason can be given why the best form of state should invariably pass 
over into that which stands next to it, 12 10. 

(/3) The case stands no better with his account of the transitions 
from the remaining forms of the state, to one another or to the best form : 
12 10 (o e 8 auTos) 1 8. 

(i) Plato adheres to the same principle that every form of polity is changed into 
the form nearest to it, whereas the change to the opposite form is quite as frequent or 
even more so, 12 10, n. 

(ii) As to the second point, Plato has said nothing definitely about the change to 
the best form of the state; but if the omission is to be supplied in accordance with his 
exposition there is nothing for it but to assume that the sole transition from Tyranny 
or into the best state is the change when the former passes into the latter: which 
would be incorrect, 12 n, 12. 

(iii) Further, in regard to the first point, the change from Oligarchy to Tyranny 
does take place, 12 13. 

(iv) Nor is the reason assigned by Plato for the change from Mixed Aristocracy 
to Oligarchy the true one. For 

(1) the true motive is different ; 

(2) what Plato takes to be the true ground for the transition to Oligarchy 
is not present in many oligarchies ; and 

(3) where it is found in Mixed Aristocracies experience shows that no such 
transition takes place, 12 14. 

VIII. CC. II, 12. 135 

(v) As regards the transition from Oligarchy, 

(a) that the state is divided into two states, one of the rich, the other of 
the poor, is not more true of Oligarchy than of the Mixed Aristocracy at Sparta 
or of other forms of government : 12 15. 

(b) The change from Oligarchy to Democracy is really clue to several causes, 
but Plato (i) only cites one of them, which does not hold except under strict 
limitations, 12 17, while (2) this cause is not altogether necessary to a revolu 
tion from Oligarchy to Democracy, provided there are other causes : 1 2 16, 18. 

(vi) Again, the transition from Democracy to Tyranny is not adequately explained, 
12 1 8. (This is almost entirely wanting*} 

(vii) Plato speaks throughout as if there were only one species of Democracy 
and of Oligarchy, 12 18. 

PART III. The third main division of the work, treating of Legislation, is 
entirely wanting. 

Symbols and Abbreviations, 

F = codex Graecus deperditus ex quo originem deduxit 
vetusta translatio latina Guilelmi de Moerbeka. 

M s cod. Mediolanensis Ambrosianus B. 105 ord. sup. 

P 1 = cod. Parisinus 2023. 

P 1 (corr. 1 ) = correctiones eiusdem cum codicis textu colons. 
p 1 = correctiones pallidiores et luteolae. 
II 1 = the agreement of FM 8 ? 1 in a reading, presumably that of their archetype. 

P 2 = cod. Parisinus Coislinianus 161. 

P 2 (corr. 1 )=correctiones eiusdem cum codicis textu coloris. 
P 2 (corr. 2 ) = correctiones nigriores. 
P 2 (corr. 3 ) = correctiones pallidiores et luteolae. 
p 2 = correctiones rubrae. 

P 3 = cod. Parisinus 2026. S b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 21. 

P 4 = cocl. Parisinus 2025. T b = cod. Urbinas 46. 

P 5 = cod. Parisinus 1858. U b = cod. Marcianus Yen. append. IV, 3. 

P (i = cod. Parisinus 1857. V b cod. Vaticano-Palatinus 160. 

Q = cod. Marcianus Venetus 200. W b cod. Reginensis 125. 

M b = cod. Marcianus Venetus 213. C c = cod. Camerarii deperditus. 

Q b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 5. Ar. cod. Aretini deperditus. 

R b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 6. Ald. = editio princeps Aldina. 

II 2 = the agreement of Aid. and all existing MSS. except M 8 ? 1 ? 5 in a reading. 
IP= ,, ,, ,, ,, ^^M 8 ? 1 ? 2 ? 3 ? 5 in a reading. 

11 = codex archetypus deperditus superstitum librorum et Aldinae. 

Bas. 1 = Basel ed. of 1531. Bas. 2 = Basel ed. of 1539. Bas. 3 = Basel ed. of 1550. 
Bk. 1 = the Berlin Aristotle in quarto edited by Imm. Bekker in 1831. 
Bk. 2 = the Politics reprinted in octavo (3rd edition in 1855 5 4th, unaltered, in i-SyS). 
Susem. 1 = Susemihl s critical edition, 1872. Susem. 2 = his edition of 1879. 

Susem. 3 = his ed. in Bibliotheca Teubneriana, 1882. Susem. 4 = the present work. 

Note that P 4 - 6 (corr.) = the corrector of P 4 and the corrector of P 6 ; but 

Y 1 and P 4 (corr.) = the first hand of P 2 and the corrector of P 4 . 
[ctpxaw] Bernays = Bernays proposes to omit apx^v from the text. 
</cat olKovofUK<> Rassow = Rassow proposes to insert /cat oiKovo^LK^ in the text. 
? Susem. Susemihl conjectures; but 
F (?) = F may have had the reading in question. 
forty * * denotes a lacuna ; that after fortv some word, or words t has been lost. 

The passages conjectured to be out of place in our authorities are, as a rule, printed 
twice over : where they occur in the MSS. in thick Clarendon type; again, in ordinary 
type, but between angular brackets < > , in the place to which the editor would trans 
pose them. 



Jekker 410. 
p. 1252 a 

c. I. 

TTcurav TTO\IV op&fjiev Koivwviav TIVOL ovaav Kal 
Trdcrav Koivaviav dyadov nvos Zveicev avveo-Tij/cviav (rov yap 
elvai SOKOVVTOS d<ya6ov %dpi,v Trdvra TrpdrTOvcn TrdvTes], Brj- 
\ov w? Tracrai fjiev d<ya6ov TLVO? o-ro^d^ovraL, jjud\icrTa 8e 
5 Kal rov Kvpuwrarov TTCLVTWV rj Tracrwv fcvpicoTdrr) KOL Tracras 

125-2 a i [e7ret-r;...7 TroXtrt/c??] Schmidt || 5 /cat before rou is omitted by II 1 R b Ar. || 
fore iraawv M s P 1 

objects in which they have common inter 
ests (TOTTOV, wrjs, so a\\ay-rjs /cat ffvfj.fji.a- 
;\;t as noivwvelv), or, as it is sometimes put, 
formed with a view to certain common 
advantages (xprftfeus /mrj efirj/jitpov eveitev : 
TTJS /tceraSocrews, crujUfta^tas, KO\UV Trpd^ewv 
Xapw)- Hence by a natural transition, 
concretely (2) the associated body, the 
members who compose the union ; so 
that 77 TroXtTt/cTj K., civil society the 
couinninity, TO KOIVOV (e.g. II. 3. i com 
pared with ii. 2. 2, iv[vn]. 14. i). See 
further on i. 2 12, 8 13, in. 9. 12. 

3 SOKOVVTOS dva-Oov] seeming good, 
which may not really be the agent s 
true interest, although he thinks so, cp. 
iv(vii). 13. 2. (See this case fully eluci 
dated Nic. Eth. in. 4 i4, 17, 20, 
the solution being 6 <nrovda ios e/cacrra Kpi- 
vei opdiios /cat ev e/cacrrots rdXtjOes avry 
(paiverai.) Both SoKelv and (paiveffdac are 
often opposed to elvai as semblance to 
reality, but while doKelv = putari to be 
thought, (paiveffdaL videri to appear, of 
an object present to sense; hence r6 5o- 
KOVV subjective opinion, rd 0at vo^eva 
objective facts. Bonitz Ind. Ar. s. v. 

4 irao-ai |i.ev...|Jia,Xi<rTa8] The clause 
with 5e gives the true apodosis to e?ret5^ : 
while all aim at some good (/card ^prj 
rov avfj-(f>epovTos e0/e^rat), the highest and 
most comprehensive aims especially at the 
highest good. 

5 KvpuoTctTOti] Cp. in. 12. i and note 

SUSEM. (1) 

Aristotle s proof, if we assume ^ TroXt- 

Introduction, cc. 1, 2 : -rrepl CHKOVO- 
p,Cas, cc. 3 13 (the latter a necessary 
preliminary to the rest of the work, Tracra 
yap cruyKeirai vro Xts e OIKIUV). The pre 
vailing tone is dialectical, and the con 
tents of Bk. I. are nearly exhausted by a 
list of the problems (aTropiac) started for 
discussion; (i) the difference between 
a city-state and a family, between TroXtrt- 
KOS and OCKOVO/JUKOS, (2) the elements of 
the state, TroXts e wv tn^/ceircu, c. 2, 
(3) the natural basis of slavery, on elcrl 
(pvcrei, TLves ol JJ.GV eXevdepoi, ol de dou\oi, 
cc. 4 6, (4) the relation of xP r lt JLa - TiffTI - K: n 
to Economic, Trbrepov rj xprj/j.a,TiaTiKr] 17 
O.VTT) rrj olKovofj.iKrj KT\ } cc. 8 n, (5) the 
capacity of the slave (and the artizan) for 
moral virtue, irorepov ZGTIV dper-r] TLS Sou- 
Xoi Trapa ras opyaviKas, 13 2 ff. See fur 
ther the Analysis and Introd. pp. 23 31. 

c. i The city is the highest form of 
association, having the highest good for 
its end: i. The city not an enlarged 
family, biit an essentially distinct organiza 
tion, as is evident ivhen it is analysed into 
its simplest elements: 2, 3. 

1 i iroXiv] A city, but at the same 
time a sovereign state. Koivwvia which 
includes any form of communication or 
social intercourse, /c. dXXa/cn/ca, commer 
cial transactions, exchange NIC. Eth. v. 5. 
9; ro.vrf]v rrjv K. TT^V ya/JUKrjv 6fj.L\iav, 
the marriage union Pol. iv(vii). 16. 2 
denotes chiefly in this treatise (i) the 
voluntary combination, association, or co 
operation of free men with each other in 

I. 1. 2] 

1252 a 11252 a 16. 
d\\a$. avrv Be ecmv 



Kal r) KOivwvia r] 

2 oaoi jjiev ovv olovrai 7ro\LTiKov Kal j3aa-L\iKov Kal oiKOvofJUKov 2 

rov avrov, ov /eaXoJ? \eyovcrLv (7f\r/06i >ydp 
Sta(f)epew, a XX OVK etSet TOVTWV 

olov av [Jbev o\,i<ya)V, 8o~7r6T7jv, dv 8e TrKeiovtov, olKovo/Aov, av 
$ en TrXeiovwv, irdKiriKov r) fiacriKiKov, 005 ovSev Sia^epov- 
crav ueyd\r)v oltclav rj fj,iKpdv iro\t,V Kal TTO\LTLKOI> oe Kal 
ftaaiKiKoVy orav f^ev auro? ec^ecrrrj Krj , (BaaiKLKov, oTav 
1 5 Be Kara roi)? Xo^yof? r^? eTTicrTrjf^ri^ TT;? rotaur^? Kara 
Kal dp^o^evo^y 7ro\iTLKov ravra 8 OVK ZUTIV 

9 elvat omitted by II 1 (added after rbv by a later hand in M s ) || 14 efaa-rrjKri M s 
(ist hand), e&crrrjKe M s (corrector), e0ecrT7?/cet P 4 6 Q (> R b S b Tb U b V b W b L s Aldine || 
15 TOJ>J is omitted bylPBk. || 16 [apxw] Kal dpxo/^evos f, Bernays (cp. III. 17. 7) 

TtKTj to be the art concerned with 77 KOC- 
vuvia. 77 TroX., is given Nic. Eth. I. 2 
5 7 ; cp. el yap Kal ravrov earw evi 
Kal TroXet, nei$v ye Kal TeXeibrepoit TO TTJS 

TToXews KaX\Loi> Kal deioTepov Wvei Kal 

TroXeffiv, sc. TO dvdpwTrivov dyaOov : which 
is more precisely described in the case of 
the city as justice and the interest of the 
community, TO KOLVTJ <rvp,(pepov. 

r\ iracrwv . . . irdo as irepiex.ovora] See;/, 
on n. 2 7, where is explained, from Nic. 
Eth. vin. y 4 6, how this supreme 
society embraces all the inferior as parts 
(uopia) of itself. 

2 8 ocroi jiev KT\] Plato Politicus 
258 E ff. ; cp. c. 3 4, 7 i, i nn. 
Socrates too expresses himself to this 
effect in Xenoph. Memorab. in. 4 6 f. 
12 77 yap -rQiV ioiwv eirt.U\La ir\"qdei. 
ia<pe"pei TTJS TUV KOLVUV. SUSEM. (2) 
A practical statesman, a 
magistrate in a free city, self-governed 
according to Greek ideas; so 8 15, 
n 13, II. 7. i TToXm/coi )( 0tX6cro0ot 
Kal I8iurai, cp. Nic. Eth. x. 9. 18 )( 
aocpLffTal. Occasionally much more than 
this, for Aristotle requires that 6 wj 0X77- 
0ws TT. should know psychology, JV. E. 
! J 3 2 7 legislation, and other 
sciences : hence joined with vofj,o6eT r)s, a 
theoretical statesman, student of politics : 
iv(vn). 4. 3, vi (iv). i 3, VHI(V). 9. 9. 

9 irXtfOei KT\] They assume that 

a king differs from e.g. a householder 

only in having more numerous, not more 

heterogeneous, dependents. Tr\i}dos = 

numbers: 8 15, Rhet. i. 4. 10 (TO 

7r\7j6os rrjs 0uXa/c^s = the strength of the 
defensive force), cp. Metaph. I. 9. 24 
dpiOfj.6s To TroXi) Kal 6\iyoi>. 

10 etSei] or Kara TO el5os, specifically, 
in kind ; et Sei dia^epei.i to be essentially 
different, because division into species 
takes account only of essential qualities. 

11 av p.V oXfywv] Schneider sup 
plies apxy here, and KaXovcn before 5ecr- 
TTOTVJV, but i>o/j,iov<TLi (elfoi) would do just 
as well in the latter case, and in line 14, 
while either dpxfl or e<peaTr)K-r) must be 
understood to follow orav 5e in line 15. 

12 ws oiiSev KT\] Whereas the state 
is composed e ct Set 5ia0epo^rw;/, II. 2. 3, 
where see n. SUSEM. (2 b) 

Plato Polit. 259 B fj.eyd\-f]^ ax^ - ot /cry- 
ffews 77 fffj,LK.pas av TroXews 07^05 i^wv n 
Trpos dpx~n v Sioiaerov ; NE. 2i2. ovdev. 
SE. OVKOVV, o VWT) 5ieffKowov/j,eda, (fiave- 
pbv ws t ! 7rt<TT77/x,?7 /j.ia ire pi iraur earl ravra. 
8e e lre j3a<Ti\iKr)v eire TTO\LTLKJ]V etVe 
res dvo/mdfci, fj.7]5ev avrf 8ia(pe- 

13 Kal TroXtTiKov 8e Kal pao~i\iKov] 

SC. OVK ei oei vouifovffi dia<pepeiv. 

15 TTJS 1T TT]S TOLaiJTT]s] l.C. Trjs TOV 

/SacriXtKou, not TT;S TOU TroXtn/coO, the regal 
science of government (Rassow Bemer- 
kungen p. 3). SUSEM. (3) 

Cp. 11. on roiaijTrjv c. 8 7- The one 
man supreme over the state is called a 
king; the ruler who follows out the prin 
ciples of the same kingly science (when 
in office), but takes his turn (Kara ^epos) 
at governing and being governed, is a 
republican magistrate. 


nOAITIKHN A. 1, 2. 

[I. 1. 3 

3 SrjXov S ea-rai TO \e^6^evov eTTKTKOirovo-i Kara TT/V v<f>r)- 3 
ryrj/juevTjv /AeOoSov, S&Trep yap ev rot? aXXot? TO avvOe- 
TOV f^e^pi, TWV dcrvvOeTtov dvdjKrj Sicupelv (ravra yap e\d- 

20 %i<TTa /j,6pia TOV TravTO^, ovrco Kai TTO\.IV e cov crvyKeiTai 
a/coTTOvvTes o^ro^eOa /cal Trepl TOVTWV fjua\\ov, TI re Siacfre- 
povcriv aXkfawv, real et TI, TtyviKov eVSe^erat \aftei,v Trepl 


2 el 8r Tt9 e 


25 wdTrep ev rot? aot? Ka ev TOVTOIS, KaXKiaT v OVTW 
2 Oewprjcreiev. dvay/cij Srj TrpwTOV avvSvd&crOai, roi)? avev 4 

17 TO Xe-yoF^vov] sc. g 6 ri ou 
^Youcrti , all between being paren 
thetical. When such side-notes are im 
bedded in the text the construction of the 
main sentence is often difficult to follow : 
* 2 2, 9, 4 i, 2, 5 46, perhaps 
13 68: ii. 10. 79 : iv(vn). 3 i, 
13 24, 16 2-4: v(vm). 5 2 
4, 1824, perhaps 6 157 I, 
7 68. In in. 9 68, vi(iv). 
4 8, 9 and perhaps in ill. 12 i, 2 
the interruption of the original construc 
tion almost amounts to anacoluthia. See 
Bonitz Aristotclische Shidien II. ill. 

Kara TTJV v(|)T]-yT]|JLV r]v [JteOoSov] in ac 
cordance with the method of inquiry 
which has previously been started or 
traced out or followed, and so the 
usual method of inquiry (Bonitz): De 
Gencr. Anini. ill. 9. i, 758 a 28 ff. : rbv 
ixpr^ri^ivov rpbirov Pol. I. 8. i, NIC. Eth. 
ii. 7. 9. The participle is passive, as is 
u0777eircu (v<prj ] yr]Tai Bk.) Pol. I. 13. 6. 
See 3 i, 8 i n. (66), in. i. 2 with n. 
(434) (Schneider). SUSEM. (4) 

1 8 wcrirep -ydp KT\] "As in other 
subjects a compound has to be resolved 
into its ultimate elements, these being 
the smallest parts of the whole, so here 
by inquiring of what elements a city," 
which is a compound III. i. 2, "is com 
posed, we shall better discover the differ 
ence between the four types above-men 
tioned (vroXm/cos, /3a<ri\i:6s, efcTpand 
whether systematic knowledge can be 
attained about them severally." Although 
he did not apply the mathematical method 
of pure deduction to biological or political 
sciences Aristotle derived both the pro 
cesses of Analysis and Synthesis and the 
terms (dva\6eiv, crvvderov StcupetV) from 
geometry : see the instructive passages 
Nic. Eth. III. 3 ii, 12 ftTew Kal 
ava\viv rbv elpijfdvov rpbirov wcrTrep Std- 
(a geometrical problem), Metaph. 

VIII (9). 9. 4 1051 a 21 29 
5 Kal ra 5iaypd/j,/j,aTa evepyeia, 
yap evpia Kova iv. 

21 TOVTwv and 23 TWV 
should be taken as above and not referred 
to c &v fftiyKeirat. (vroXts) as the gramma 
tical antecedent. 

c. 2 Origin of the city from the 
family through the village-community: 
i 8. The city a natural institution 
8 12, prior in the intention of nature 
to the family and individual 13, 14, 
and of incalculable litility 15, 16. 

We have here the Patriarchal Theory, 
as it is called by Sir H. Maine, applied 
to the origin of society. The family living 
under the headship of the father is taken 
as the ultimate social unit. Until quite 
recently this was the accepted view : see 
Maine Ancient Law c. 5 esp. 122 135, 
Early History of Institutions c. 3, Early 
Laio and Custom cc. 7, 8. There are 
certain difficulties of this derivation of 
the state which Aristotle avoids by mak 
ing the combination of families of different 
stocks (yevr)) depend on contiguity of 
residence and on convenience. See J. F. 
McLennan s criticisms Studies in Ancient 
History, esp. 213227, 235309. 

On the origin of civil society there is 
something in Plato Rep. II. 369 B ff., Laws 
111.676 682, 4 7, Cicero 
De Rep. i. 25, 26 39 42 (with Lac- 
tantius Instit. VI. 10), De Off. I. 17 53, 
54, De Fin. ill. 6267. A. C. Brad 
ley Hellenica 190 212 gives the best 
commentary on cc. 1,2; Oncken Slaats- 
lehre II. 3 27 is also helpful, 

1 24 TO irpd-y^aTa <j>] 
"things in their growth or origin" 
(Shilleto); Plato Rep. 369 A, Laws 7570. 

2 26 o-vv8va^(r0ai] Nic. Eth. vm. 
12. 7 avdpuTros yap rfj (pvcrei 
17 ?roXiTi/c6y. 

; 2 .3] 

1252 a 17-1252 b 2. 


\evov rf) 

ravra ^ T 
d oe<nroTBf 
125a boui; SwtyMrro* TO 


Tr)V &\<f>l,Kr)V 

Susem. 1 - || 32 


"^b aeus (p. 324 ) Susem. 1 - || 32 5taj/o^<Tci 5eovra> ? Susem. || 
Wi] Thurot || 33 raOra after T$ <rt6/*ari II 3 Bk. || wet /cat Ar., /cat 
k., &px&nevov, [/cat] 0i5<m Bernays 

<t>V<Tf \Tl\\r 

" -i-MV. > f , v , , L _, , 

1252 b 2 oi is omitted by II 2 Bk. 

27 olov] "namely," introducing the 
two relationships (each of which needs 
a long parenthetical explanation) into 
which the family can be analysed, 5. 

28 Kal TOVTO KT\] Cp. Zel ler 
Philosophic dcr Gricchcn 1 1 ii 511, who 
quotes DC Aniina II. 4. 2, 415 a 26 
0f<rt/cwraTOz> yap ru>v 2pya}i> TOIS ^Cxnv 
o<ra T^Xeta...TO Trot^crat erepov olov auro, 

j~(OV fji^V ^(jJQV (bVTOV & d)VTOV. tVtt TOV 

del /cat TOV deiou /xer^wcrtt 17 dvvavrcii.. 
Individuals perish but the species, the 
kind, is immortal. So first Plato Sy-mpos. 
206 E, 207 c 208 B. SUSEM. (5) 

OVK K irpoaiptVws] not by design, or 
of deliberate purpose, 77 yap Trpoatpecrts 
fj.Ta \6yov /cat Siavoias: instinctively. 

30 apxov KT\] "governor and gov 
erned by nature" clearly = " master and 
slave " not as i 2 political ruler and 

31 On Aristotle s conception of 0u<rts 
in general Zeller Ph. der Gr. ii ii 384 
389, 422 431; Grant Ethics I. 279 
28(5. Various senses of the term Metaph. 

v(A).c. 4 . 

8id Ti]V <ro)TT]pCav] "for preservation": 
i.e. to secure the means of subsistence. 
How far this is true of the slave by 
birth on Aristotle s view is explained 5 
6 10, as Fiilleborn has correctly 
observed: in the case of the master it 
should be remembered that without slaves 
in his household he can procure at best 
but a poor and uncertain subsistence : 
see 5 n. (15), 4 r 4. SUSEM. (6) 

rd filv yap KT\] Cp. 5 8 10, u 
6 . (103). SUSEM. (6b) 

33 Tavra^aTo 

3 34 816 SetnroTT] KT\] It is 
not simply, as Fiilleborn (ii. 75) sup 
poses, that both master and slave are 
alike interested in the establishment of 
this relationship : Aristotle really means 
that the master s interest is advantageous 
for the slave, and conversely : cp. 6 10 
n. (57). Only the advantage to the slave 
comes indirectly, /card ffv/uL[3e(3i<]K6s, in. 6. 
6 n. (L. Schiller). SUSEM. (7) Cp. 5 2. 

1252 b i ov8v -yelp KT\] "For 
nature never fashions things niggardly, 
for various and dissimilar purposes, as 
Delphic cutlers do their knife " (Shilleto). 

2 rip/ A\(JHKT]V |xdx.cupav] "Accord 
ing to Hesychios, s. v. , the Delphian knife 
had the upper part only of iron, \a/j.j3dvov(ra 
jj.TTpoffdv /utpos (Tidripovv; the handle, per 
haps also the back, was of wood. Gottling 
De m. D. quae est apud Aristoteletn (Jenae 
1856. 4) maintains it was a knife and 
spoon combined, for sacrificial purposes " 
(Schnitzer). Hence Gottling proposes 
IJivffTpov for ftepos in Hesychios, as 
above. Oncken, II. 25 27, dismisses 
the obscure words of Hesychios in favour 
of Oresme s explanation: "suppose a 
piece of iron with a thick end and a 
pointed end, with the back left rough 
and the other side sharpened to a blade. 
Then you have a knife for cutting, you 
can file with the rough back, and by 
turning it round use the thick end for a 
hammer. Such a rough sort of tool 
would certainly be cheap enough." 
Cp. 6^\LffKo\vx"i.a. Vl(iv). I5/ 8 n. 
SUSEM. (8) Ae\0t/cij //.axatpa <^7rt TWV 
0t\o/ce/35wj> Makarios ap. Walzium Arsen. 
179: with which agrees the explanation 


A. 2. 



5 rb after Kal 

in append, prov. I. 94 (ton-r 
the Corpus Paroemiograph. 
1839) AeX0t/C7j p;dxatpa : e~7rt 
KepS&v /cat ctTTO -rravrbs \a^dve 
IJL&WV, irapbaov ot AeX0ot r6 
lepelwv e\a^a.vov,rb S^ 
(?for the use of the knife) eTrpdrroz/ro. 
Athenaeus iv. 74 p. 173: A%cuos 6 
Eperpteus ei> A\Kfj.aiwvi TO? crarupt/ctij xapv- 
KOTTOIOVS /caXet TOVS Ae\<f)ovs dia TOVTUV 
Kapi//co7rotot)s irpoff[3\e7ru>v /SSeXurrOyUar 
Trapocrov ret iepela TrepLrep.vovres djjXov ciis 
ejjiayelpevov aura Kal eKap{iKevov. eh ravra 
de airofiXeirwv /cat Aptcrro0a,^?7S e 7 ? AXX 
(5 Ae\0wt TrXetVras a/coz><2>z | ^or/Se /xa- 
%atpas | /cat 7rpoc)tc)cicr/ca>j roi)s crous irpoirb- 
Xoi s. It was from Thomas Aquinas a^ 
locum that Oresme derived the explanation 
cited above. See Von Ilertling Rhein. 
Mits. xxxix. p. 447. Mr W. Ridgeway 
thinks the name given to "a large kind 
of knife, which could he used for either 
fighting or carving, from the sacrificial 
knife having been used as a weapon to 
slay Pyrrhus, Pindar Ncm. vii. 42." 

3 v irpos v] There are of course 
exceptions to this rule, as Aristotle himself 
allows De Part. Anim. iv. 6. 13, 683 a 22 
OTTOV yap epJexerat xprjaOai dvfflv eiri 5u 
^P7a /cat /z?) e/xTroSt ^eti ?rpos erepov, ou- 
5ei/ r/ 0ucrts elude iroiflv uxnrep i) %aX- 
KevTLKi] ?rpoj eJreXetai/ o/3eXt(r/coXu%i ioi p 
dXX OTTOI; p: 1 )) e^5^%erat, /caraxp^rat rw 
ai ry eVt TrXetw epya. SlJSEM. (9) See 
/)<? Anima II. 8. 10, 420 b 16. We 
shall find the rule applied to political 
offices n. ii. 13, vi(iv). 15. 6. 

4 p/i^ iroXXois ^PYOLS KT\] "if re 
stricted in use to a single function." Fiille- 
born asserts that the conclusion does not 
follow from the premises, even supposing 
there is no exception to the rule (see 
preceding note). But surely the propa 
gation and the preservation of the species 
are two different ends. At the same 
time Aristotle should have emphasized 
the fact that woman is not nearly so far 
below man as the natural slave (see 2) 
is below his master. SUSEM. (10) 

4 5 cv 8* TOIS Pappdpois KT\] 
Whereas in Greece wife and slave are 
distinct, in barbaria they are not, be 
cause all men and women are slaves 
(Jackson). In Thrace e.g. the women 
did farm-work /j.tjdei 5ta0epoVra;s r&v 

is omitted by II 2 Bk. 

L P; 393 of 


xes are slaves we should 
they 7 " P^ re all equal. (I n this last 
deed C jPngreye seriously takes thirds" 
supplyiC* T Y avTr >\ *X ra>sc. ro?s 
aXXots rots ^"O-P^ecri Kal rots SecrTrorais.) 

" Fiilleborn s ^ Abjections arise from his 
having been misled b/" the omission men 
tioned above, in n. (10), c.q.nd so having 
misunderstood the real sense 01 f the pas 
sage. Aristotle s meaning is this : ^ e _ 
cause the barbarian nations are slaves by 
nature, the men are not capable of re 
specting the freedom of the female sex 
in the women, and of according to them 
the position which by nature belongs to 
the woman in relation to the man ; but 
treat them as slaves. And hence neces 
sarily arises the perversion of nature, that 
in the marriage relation you have one 
slave ruling despotically over another. 
To the same cause, the servile character 
of these nations, or at least of the Asiatics 
(i. 6. 8 .), Aristotle attributes the fact 
that they themselves are ruled by their 
kings as slaves ; or in other words that 
the form under which the state exists 
amongst them is despotism, ill. 14. 6 n., 
which in reality cannot be considered to 
constitute a state at all, a state consisting 
of free citizens but not of slaves, 7 i, 
in. 9 6, 12 8; cp. vi(iv). 4 n, a 
passage which is probably not genuine. 
Such a despotism is only an abnormally 
expanded family: ( non civitas erit sed 
magna familia, Grotius De ^^tre belli ac 
pads in. 8. 2). It is a species of that 
which Aristotle denotes by edvos, i.e. a 
mere aggregate of men of the same race, 
a tribe population or nationality, as con 
trasted with TroXts, a city-state: 6; 11. 

i 35 ni. 3 5, 13 19. H 15; 
iv(vn). 4 ii ; vin(v). 10 8 with nn.; 
Nic. Eth. i. 2. 8, 1094 b 10; Rhet. i. 5. 5 
1360 b 31: cp. Schlosser i. 278. [Cp. 
e6vos = federation in Polybios and Dio- 
doros, esp. of the Achaean and Aetolian 
Leagues : 5t edvLKas xP et as f r federal 
purposes Diod. xvin. 13.] See further 
. (13): 5 8, 6 46 with nn. (47), 
(54), (56): 7 5, 8 12; iv(vn). 2 15, 
14 21 with nn." SUSEM. (11) 

I. 2. 5] 

1252 b 3 1252 b 15. 


6 rdgiv. ai-riov 8e on TO $vo-ei (ip%ov OVK %ov(Tiv, d\\d ylverai, (I) 
77 Koivwvid avTwv SouX??? KOI SovXov. 816 fyacriv ol Troit^ral 

j3ap(3apd)V " EXXrjvas ap%fiv ei/toy, 

5 ? ravro (fivaei, /3dp/3apov KOI $ov\ov ov. ( etc fjiv ovv rovrcov TWV G 
10 Svo KOivaiviwv oiKia Trpwrfj, real 6pQa)<$ f H<j/oSo? etTre 


o yap pou? avr oixerov Tot? irevrjcriv ecmv. 

TI fjiev ovv et? Trdcrav r^Jiepav avveaTrficvla KOivwvla Kara 

<$>VO~iV oZ/CO? CTTLV, Ol)? 6 /JLV Xap&wSa? Ka\L OfAOCriTTVOVS, Evrt- 

15 /jLVio~7]s Se o Kp?}? o/jLorcaTTOvs ?j 8 e; TfKeiovwv oi/ciwv /coivwvla 7 

oV before TO.VTO P, omitted by M s P 1 || 12 effriv * * Susem. 1 wrongly, see Dit- 
tenbcrgcr Gott. gel. Anz. 1874 p. 1372 ff. || 15 b^oKairvovs n 1 P 4 L s Susem. 1 and M b 
(corr. ), perhaps rightly, but see Dittenberger p. 1357 ff. and Commentary ;/. (17): 
ofto/caTTous = 6/j.oKr)irovs Ridgeway (also Shilleto in unpublished Adversaria: si Epi- 
menides epica pocsi utebatur, certe o/Ao/ccnn ous. Nisi forte o / ao/ca7rous = o/ 

8 Euripides Iphigenia in Anlis 1400 
Nauck. The words following are d\X 
01) (3ap(3apovs, /ut-^rep, EXX^wj/ TO ytcef yap 
5ov\ov, oi 5 \i>depoi. SUSEM. (12) 

9 ws Tcujrd KT\] In this Aristotle 
only expresses the view which had gradu 
ally become universal among the Greeks, 
and was not combated until a late period 
and then by but few : 3 4 n. (31). This 
view is explained by the justifiable con 
sciousness they had of their mental su- 

periority; it was especially fostered by 
the Persian war, and found external con 
firmation in the fact that the vast ma 
jority of Greek slaves were of barbarian 
origin, while in itself again it tended to 
hinder the enslavement of Greeks (L. 
Schiller). See also n. (47) on i. 5 10. 
That slaves are non-Hellenes is assumed 
quite as an understood thing in Xenoph. 
Mcmor. n. 7. 6, Demosth. xxi (c. Mid.}. 
48. See however n. (64) on I. 7 5. 
SUSEM. (13) 

5 ro irpwTT]] preclicatively, "from 
these two relationships," man and wife, 
master and slave, "arises primarily the 
family." For the sense, irporepov /cat 
dvayKaiorepov olida TrdXewj NIC. Eth. 
vill. 12. 7. The three stages, oi /a a KW/XT; 
TroXis, are given by Plato Laws I. 626 c ff. 

HtrioSos] Works and Days 405. 
Clearly Aristotle did not know of the 
spurious line 406 in our texts, KTTJTTJV 
S ov yafj-er-qv, 177-15 Kai fiov<riv ZITOLTO. 
SUSEM. (14) 

1-2 6 -yd-P P^s KT\] "the ox sup 
plies the place of a servant. " Cp. 5 9 

11. (46). If with both these passages we 
compare 4 i 4, it is evident that 
Varro s division DC re rustica I. 17, 
which Grotius mentions op. c. I. 5. 3, 
is quite in the sense and spirit of Aris 
totle : alii in tres partes (sc. diviclunt) 
instrument! genus : vocale et semivocale 
et mutum. vocale in quo sunt servi : 
semivocale in quo sunt boves : mutum, 
in quo sunt plaustra. (L. Schiller.) 
SUSEM. (15) 

12 i] [&V ovv TtrX] yuei^p?^, not 6V, 
repeating after the quotation from Hesiod 
the clause 9 e/c fj.ev ovv KT\. Take /caret 
(f)v<n.v with ffiveo-T-rjKvIa: "thus then the 
society which in the order of nature has 
arisen to meet every-day needs is the 
household : sharers in one meal-jar as 
Charondas calls them; joint-holders of 
a piece of land in the phrase of Epi- 
menides the Cretan. The union of a 
number of families first formed with a 
view to needs beyond those which are of 
daily recurrence is the village." Else 
where in Aristotle e(j>irj/JLepos lasting for 
a day ; so Bernays here, "for intercourse 
of less transitory duration." 

14 XapcovSas] II. 12 7, n n. 
(416); vi(iv). n 15, 13 2 nn. Holm 
Geschichte Siciliens im Alterthum (Leip 
zig 1870) i. p. 153 ff., 401. SUSEM. (16) 

EmjitviSiis] See Excursus I at the 
end of this book, p. 204. SUSEM. (17) 

15 op-OKairovs] The reading is doubt 
ful." (i) The MSS. of the better family 
give 6 / uo/ca7n ous. (2) If Aristotle is quot 
ing from a collection of oracles (XpijfffAot) 



[I. 2. 5 

6 Trpwrrj %pij crew? eveicev /JLT) ec^Tj/juepov KCO/JLTJ. //-aXttfra S eoi/ce (I) 
17 Kara (frvcriv r) KCO/^TJ aTroiKia o IK las elvai, 01)9 KaXovvi 

16 &>e after 17 /card 

piJPBk. || 17 AT [olKla] Heitland, but see the 

ascribed to Epimenides, then, as these 
would be written in hexameters, the text 
requires a word capable of standing in an 
hexameter verse and b^oKairvovs, which 
satisfies this condition, appears to possess 
a decided advantage. For o/jioxdirovs of 
the inferior MSS. is usually taken to be a 
compound with KOTTT; a trough, crib; 
hence any fccding-placc ; and if this ety 
mology be correct nothing but arbitrary 
lengthening of the first syllable in arsi 
could adapt the word to an hexameter 
verse. (3) Gottling, again, thinks that 
Epimenides could not possibly have called 
the families of the Cretans mess-mates, 
because the avaairLa were established 
amongst them. But, even assuming that 
Epimenides actually wrote the line in 
question, there was, as Dittenberger re 
marks, no absolute necessity that he should 
confine himself in this oracle to the cir 
cumstances of Crete, especially as his 
influence was actively felt far beyond the 

In favour of o/moKdwovs Dittenberger 
urges that it is like Aristotle to support 
the results of his own inquiries by a sub 
sequent appeal to the language of com 
mon life, to proverbs, passages in the 
poets, or specially significant sayings 
and expressions of prose writers. In 
this place Charondas and Epimenides are 
evidently quoted for this same purpose, 
in connexion with the definition of the 
family as a society existing for the whole 
of daily life. Consequently it is the satis 
faction of daily recurring needs which 
brings individuals together in a house 
hold. The expression of Charondas (and 
that of Epimenides also, if we read 6//o- 
Kd-rrovs) fits in perfectly with this, by 
making common participation in food, 
which is the most important daily need, 
characteristic of the household. But 6fj.o- 
Kairvovs = smoke-fellows could only be 
taken as alluding to the common sacri 
ficial fire, which would not suit the pre 
sent context, although it is true that from 
the point of view of the Greek the family 
was a society for worship. Yet 

O/ULOKCLTTVOVS should be understood of sharers 
in the smoke of the common hearth, just 
as we might speak of hearths meaning 

homes or families*; thus the same idea 
of a common participation in food would 
be denoted but in a different form. 

All these difficulties Ridgeway (Camb. 
Philological Soc. Transactions Feb. 23, 
1882) seeks to avoid by retaining the 
reading 6/j.oKdtrovs (with a), Doric for O/JLO- 
/c?77roi;s (K^TTOS) = with a common plot of 
ground. SiJSEM. (17) 

"The Cretan poet used a Doric form, 
for the retention of the dialectic form in 
Aristotle cp. GaAeco 1. 11. 12: Krjiros is 
the common plot of ground that furnishes 
the common food supply ((mrv-rj): cp. II. 
5. 2 (yrjTreSov and Kap-rros). The scale of 
social development here indicated seems to 
be ( i ) original ot /a a : (2) ol/cos=joint family 
of Hindus or Slavonic house-community, 
where the proceeds of the undivided pro 
perty (KTJTTOS) must be brought into a 
common chest or purse : vide Sir H. 
Maine" (Early Law 237 255): after 
that, " (3) the ol/cos breaks up into separate 
olKiai forming the KWJJLT] ( the Russian vil 
lage community) : all are sprung of believe 
themselves to be sprung from a common 
ancestor (6/jLoyd\aKTes)" (Ridgeway). For 
the undivided family property comp. E. 
de Laveleye La propricte primitive cc. 
13 15 (Engl. tr. pp. 175 214), Hearn 
Aryan Household 176 191, and the criti 
cism by D. McLennan Patriarchal Theory 
c. 8: also Caillemer Droit de succession 
p. 34 ff., Jannet Les institutions sociales 
et le droit civil a Sparte (Paris 1880) 
p. 88. 

q 8 IK irXeiovwv KT\] Instances of 
services needed from time to time for 
which members of a village community 
unite (as distinct from the daily wants 
which originate the family) are, to repel 
a common enemy or to execute a great 
work of common utility (Fiilleborn II. 
95, 96). Add the exchange of commodi 
ties, which is unnecessary in the house 
hold: 9 5 with note. SUSEM. (18) 

1 6 7rpwTi] = simplicissima, quae tam- 
quam pars inest aliis (Bonitz). 

6 1 7 TI Kc6[AT) diroiKfa olKfas] /. e. all 
the rest of the village except the original 

* So Grote, "each society having its separate 
meal-bin and fireplace." Cp. Gaelic teadhloch 
and coedich, J. F. McLennan p. 123. 

I. 2. 6] 

1252 b 16 1252 b 20. 


6/j,oyd\aKTa<; [TratSo? re Kal Trai&wv TratSa?]. Sib Kal TO Trp&TOv (1) 
/3a(ri\6voi>To al TroXei?, ^at vvv GTL TO, Wvv] IK 
20 yap \crvvrj\6ov\ Traaa yap oiKia ftaaiXeveTai VTTO TOV 

1 8 * * Troudas Schmidt, [ircudds TratSas] Susem. |j 20 avi>rj\dov wanting in 

II 1 (added by p 1 in the margin) || TraVa yap] TraVa 5 Schmidt in a former conjec 
ture, transposing 18 5to 20 o~vvrj\0oi> to follow 24 $KOVI> (now withdrawn) 

household may be most naturally re 
garded as a colony or offshoot of the 
original household. SUSEM. (18 b) 

1 8 6(JLO-yd\aKTas] According to Phi- 
lochoros Frag. 91 94 and Frag. 139 
in Harpokration and Suidas (s. vv. yei>- 
v-fJTai, o/AoydXaKTes, opyeuves) the mem 
bers of each of the 360 ancient Attic 
yevr) who were afterwards called yevvyj- 
rcu = kin, clansmen, were originally called 
6/j,oya\aKTes = foster-brothers, fellow-nurs 
lings (]. G. Schneider Addenda II. 471). 

Pollux VI. 37, VIII. 9 Ot fJ,TXOVTS TOV 

yevovs eKaXovvTO yevvrJTai. Kal o/moyaXaK- 
res, yevet. fj.ev ou TrpoaTJKOVTes, e/c de rr?y 
awodov OVT<JJ Trpoaayopevo/j-evoL. Su- 
SEM. (19) 

Thus only is the 7eVos hinted at here. 
"The identity of the KU/UL-TJ and the yevos 
is apparently indicated Hi. 9 12, 14 
where we have the TrdXts defined as (a) 
?j rou u fyv KQLvwvia Ko.1 Ttt?s ot/ctats /cat 
rots ye veer i, and (/>) TJ yev&v /cat 
KU/J.UV /coti/wfia" (lieitland Notes 8). 
Even then no place in the development 
is found for (fiparpiai, <pv\ai, or Aristotle s 
associations for common sacrifices and 
religious festivals A 7 ic. Eth. vm. 9. 5 ; 
cp. Pol. in. 9. 13 (Oncken). Apparently 
they are held to be of later origin than 
the state. Nor is there any explicit 
reference to cru^ot/cto ftds, although, as 
Stein suggests, Aristotle has doubtless 
been influenced by the history of Attica. 

As to the meaning of 6/j.oyd\aKTes, 
Aristotle unquestionably understood it 
to imply common ancestry in our sense, 
even if TratSas re /cat iraiftwv TratSas be 
rejected as a gloss. And this may well 
have been the sense in which it was 
anciently applied to the clansmen (761^77- 
TCU). For descent had long been reckoned 
through males in Athens, indeed Di- 
kaiarchos (Fr. 9 Muller) appears to de 
note by Trdrpa what is usually called the 
ytvos: and even where individuals not 
connected by blood had entered a clan 
they may have come to believe the con 
trary. (See Maine Early Law p. 272 If.) 


Or the word may have first meant those 
of kin by descent through females only. 
On the evidence of Spartan and Athenian 
customs, and from indications in Homer 
and the legends, it has been with good 
reason inferred that this system of kinship 
once prevailed in Greece, McLennan 
op. c. 225 309: cp. I,. II. Morgan 
Ancient Society c. 8 esp. 230 234. "If 
b/u.oyd\aKTe5 = members of a 7^0?, the 
name itself demonstrates that this member 
ship in the 7^0$ depended on their hav 
ing had the same mother s milk" (Ridge- 
way). If so, may we similarly interpret 
6/u.o(ri7rvoi and ofjiOKairvoi. as survivals from 
a time when eating from the same meal- 
jar or sharing the same smoke, and not 
inheritance of the same father s blood, 
constituted in a savage society the earliest 
idea of kinship? See Exc. I to B. n. 

Another meaning proposed is : those 
who offer the same milk , from a com 
parison of Sanskrit sapinda, samanodaka 
= those who offer the same cake, the 
same water: i.e. near kin , distant 
kin respectively (I learn op. c. 171) : but 
for this there is no evidence. 

816 = hence : viz. because the city 
arose through the village from the family. 
Thus Plato argues Laws ill 680 D ff.: ei> 
oh TO TrpeafivTCLTQv o.pxf- 8td TO T-TJV apx^v 
avTots e/c Trarpds /cat /j.r]Tp6s yeyovtvai... 
(BaaiXelav iraauiv St/catoTctrrji /Sao tXeuo/iej ot. 
19 al iroXeis = Hclloiic city-states, 
TO. t0VT] = non-Hellenic races or popula 
tions. As in iv(vil). 2. 10 ert 5 1 ev rots 
6ve<n TroVt rots Swaptvois Tr\OveKTfiv... 
olov ev 2/cu#ais /cat UepaaLs /cat Qpa^l /cat 
Ke\ro?s, Aristotle uses edvy on the grounds 
assigned in n. ( 1 1 ) as equivalent to non- 
Hellenes, precisely as the word is used in 
the New Testament for Gentiles )( Jews 
and Christians r6 irpwrov] Other reasons 
assigned in. 14 12, 15 n nn. (657 9), 
vui(v). 10 3 (1649). SUSEM. (19 b) 
Also, as Postgate suggests, vi(iv). 13 n. 
On the advantages of monarchy in a 
primitive society, see Bagehot Physics and 
Politics 65 f. (Jackson). 




[I. 2. 6 

7 ware Kal at cnroiKiai 8i rrjv (rwyyeveiav. fcal rovr eo-rlv o X^yet (P. 3) 

e exaoros 
naidcov 778 dXo^cot . 

yap KOI ovrco TO dp^alov WKOVV. Kal rou? #601)9 
25 Se Sta TOUTO TTai/re? c^acri ftaoriXevea-Oat,, OTI Kal avrol 01 /juev 
en Kal vvv o t Se TO dp^alov ej3a<ri,\6vovTO, wcnrep Se Kal TCL ei&7) 
eavrols d(^o^oiovcnv ol dvOpcoTroi, OVTM Kal TOI)? ftiovs rwv Oeatv. 
8 TI 8 IK, 7r\eiovwv Kto/jicop Koivwvia reXeto? TroXts rjfir), Trdcrrjs p. 

e^ovo-a Trepan Trjs avrapKelas w? eVo? elirelv, ryivofjuevr) 
30 ovv rov ^TJV eveKev, ovcra $e rov ev tfjv. SLO iraaa TroXi? ( 

11 at is omitted by M 8 P 1 , whether rightly, is very doubtful || 24 airopddes yap 
Kal O/TTW < 0,7x17 eiVoj>es > Schmidt edits, (TiropdSes -yap Kal OVTOI [r6 apxalov] and 
26 wo-Trep yap Schmidt formerly (now withdrawn) || 28 r; 5r) M 8 P 2 -3-4.6. C 4 QM b 
QI, R i> S b T t, v t> W b Aldine Bk., y Se IP L 8 || r? 5 ... 1253 a i jSArto-Tov transposed 
by Schmidt to follow 18 TratSaj. See his arrangement and alterations Introd. p. 96 |] 
29 yevo/j-^r) Schneider || 30 ovv is wanting in M^ 1 , but cp. iv (vn). 10 i, 1329 b 3 

2 1 wcrT Kal at air.] Wherefore like 
wise the colonies {i.e. the villages] be 
cause of their kinship sc. /3a<rtXeuoi Tat. 
So II wcrre /cat TO 5t/catoi> (Shilleto). 

7 22 The quotation from Homer 
Odyss. ix. ii4f. SUSEM. (20) Cited N. E. 
x. 9. 13. Plato has it Laws 680 B. Cp. 
Maine Ancient Law pp. 4 6, 125. 

24 r6 dpxcuov] With the adverbial 
use comp 

Xen. Hdlen. V. 2. 7 Kaddirep 

24 ff. "A reminiscence of the famous 
saying of Xenophanes given by Clem. 
Alex. VII p. 711 B: "EAX^z/es 5 wairep 
dvOp<jjTrofJ,6p(povs OUTW /cat df#pa>7ro7ra$eZs 
TOI)S 6*601)5 VTTOTi6evTai. Kal Kaddirep rds 
fj-opfids avrwv o^otas eauTOts e/cacrTot 5ta- 
(wypa<povcriv" (Ridgeway). 

See still stronger statements about the 
popular religion in Mctaph. Xil(A). 8 
1921, 1074 b 3ff. 

8 28 r 8 K irXtiovwv KT\] Cp. n. 
2 8 with note and references, also n. on 
in. 3 3, 4; 9 10 (554). SUSEM. (20 b) 

"The union of several village-com 
munities forms, when complete, an actual 
city, attaining, so to speak, the limit of 
perfect self-sufficience : at the outset a 
union for a bare livelihood, it exists to 
promote a higher life. " See Grote History 
II. 341 344 on city-state )( villages: on 
this deduction of the state generally A. C. 
Bradley Hellenica 197 199, who observes 
194 n. that "freedom", though not in a 
mere negative sense, best answers to av- 
rapKeia: a life which leaves no want of 

man s nature, external or spiritual, un 
satisfied. In N. E. I. 7. 7 TO atfrap/ces = 8 
fj.ovoufj.evov aiperbv Trotet TOI> fiiov Kal /UT;- 
5ev6s tvded, the sole condition of a life 
that is desirable and lacks nothing. Cp. 
N.E. X. 6. 2 ovSevos evderjs. . . dXX avrapKys. 

29 ff. Compare c. 4 i ; u. 2 8 ; in. 
i 12, 6 3, 4 ff., 9 5,6, ii 14, esp. 
17 yev&v Kal KUfj.&v KOivwvia fays TeXetas 
/cat avrdpKovs <xdpi.v>. TOVTO d ecrriv, ws 
(pa/j.v, rb rjv us Kal /caXws. TWV 
Ka\&v dpa Trpd^euv [%dpt^] Oereov elvai rr\v 
wo\iTLKr]v KOLvuviav, dXX ov TOV ffu^TJv ; 
further in. 12 9, 13 i, 18 i ; iv(vn). 
4 1 114, 5 i, 8 4, 8, 9, 9 i , 2 ; 
Vl(iv), 4 911; vn(vi). 8 3. These 
passages would prove (even if it were not 
self-evident) that the perfected and beauti 
fied life, made complete self-sufficing and 
satisfying, is one with the life of happi 
ness or well-being (evdaiuovta) : cp. n. 
(284) on n. 9 5. SUSEM. (21) 

The implication of eu ffjv and avrdp- 
Keia which disposes of Schmidt s athetesis 
of the clauses where the latter conception 
comes in (Jahrb. f. Phil. cxxv. 1882. 
804, cp. Introd. 97 n.} may also be studied 
in Nic. Eth. i. 7 68. In De anima 
II. 8. 10, 420 b 19 22, TO ev is op 
posed to dvayKalov, to e dvayKys in 
De part, animal, in. 7. 18, 670 b 23. 

30 816 KT\] Two proofs that the city 
is natural, (i) It is the outcome and 
realization, the final cause, of the previous 
societies : they are natural, so also is the 
city . (2) It alone is fully self-sufficing 

I. 2. 9] 

1252 b 21 1253 a 3. 





tea a 

vrpamu Koivwviai. reXo? yap avrrf e/celvwv, (I) 
eariv olov yap eKacrrov earn TTJS 
rrjv V<TIV elvai eKaaro 

9 dvOpwTrov ITTTTOV ot/aa?. ert TO ou kvexg, real TO reXo? {3e\Ti- 
1253 a O-TOI/* T; S avrdpKia [xal] reXo? /cat (3e\Tia-TOv. etc TOVTWV ovv (f>a- 
vepov OTI, TOJv (j)uo~6i> r] TroXt? ear/, /cat ort 6 dvOpwTros (j)V(TL TroXt- 
e#Tt, /cal 6 aTToXt? 3ta fyvcriv /cal ov Sid Tvyrjv IJTOL <fcav\6<$ 

.eo-T^] Schmidt || 33 ea cu after ^KOCTTOV M s P 1 
KCU before rAos omitted by II 1 Bk. Bernays || rAos. /cat <yap> 

Kal before jSAricrrov omitted by 
* * <k Schmidt, quoting zaySb 
ov uvdpuiros CCTTL Schmidt 
6 omitted by II 2 Bk. || 0au- 

TIKOV ^wov 

32 [r? 

1253 a 

Bernays, avrapKeia * * Biicheler; but see Comm. 
W b Aid. || i) ...... P&TUTTOV omitted by O M b T b 

i(j 28 H 2 [6 rt ...... 7r6Xts eerri] and ort 0ucret Tr 

|| ">3 CO-TI M 8 , omitted by P 1 II 2 Bk. perhaps rightly 

? Oncken wrongly || lyrot Kpeirruv TJ &v6. TJ 0au\6s eVr a?/^. Schmidt 

but to be self-sufficing is end and highest 
good (and end = fully developed nature). 

Against whom, we may ask, is this 
directed ? No doubt there were Sophists 
who criticized political institutions, of 
whom Hippias and Thrasymachus may 
serve as opposite types. But perhaps 
Antisthenes was the first deliberately to 
oppose the outcome of civilization and to 
advocate a return to a ruder and simpler 
.life : Zeller Socrates and Socratics p. 322 
5. The anti-social theories of Plato s 
Callicles in the Gorgias, of Thrasymachus 
and the speakers in Republic B. II, are 
not directly subversive of the state : like 
Hobbism, they are conservative in their 

32 TI 8* <|>v<ris Tt Xos] Physics n. i. 8 
193 a 30 f. <f>v(ns in first sense = v\r) mere 
potence ; in second sense = 17 /J-op^rj Kal 
r6 eldos TO Kara rov \6yov. ucnrep yap 
erai TO /card r^v Tt~xyt\v Kal TO 
OVT<JJ Kal <pv(Tis TO icard <pvcnv 
X^yercu Kal TO (pvffiKov : II. 2 8, 194 a 
28 f. 17 5 0i5cris rAos Kal ov ZveKa wv 
yap crvvexovs ri}s KLvqaews ov<n)s ZffTi TL 
^crxarov, TOVTO rAos Kal TO ov ^e/ca... 
/3oi)\6rat yap ov TTO.V elvat TO crx aTOV 7"Aos, 
dXXd TO j3^\Ti<TTov. De anima III. 12. 3. 
434 a 32 f. (Eaton). " Is it the bud, or 
the blossom, or the ripe fruit that is 
natural to a tree ? All three : only it is 
unnatural and contrary to the design of 
the tree that the bud should wither be 
fore coming into bloom and bearing 
fruit " (Fiilleborn). SUSEM. (22) 

9 34 f. ?Ti...p XTiorov] The whole 
connexion requires that this should be a 
second proof (or at least an amplification 
of the first proof) 6 rt iracra iroXis (pvaei 
tarlv. And so in fact it is, only it must 

be supplemented from what precedes. It 
runs thus : the final cause, that is, the 
end, of a thing is best. Now self-suffi 
ciency is the end and the best (thus in 
cluding under one both the subject and 
the predicate of the former premiss). 
With this must be mentally supplied 
from the foregoing ; the end discloses 
the tine nature of the thing , and po 
litical society alone (i.e. no society short 
of the state) affords to its members 
true self-sufficience . Then the conclu 
sion follows that the state is by nature. 
Similar abbreviations of the steps in an 
argument are found elsewhere in Aristotle, 
so concise sometimes as to be almost un 
intelligible : e.g. Metaph. xn(A). i 2, 
5, 1069 a 24, b 5 (Freud enthal). SU 
SEM. (23) 

1253 a i From this then it appears that 
the city is part of the order of nature 
and man a social being . N.E. IX. 9. 3 : 
no one would choose the possession of 
every good to be by himself, KOSTIKOV yap 
6 avdpUTTos Kal <TV TJV 7re0u/cos. See also 
ib. i. 7. 6. "The dogma TUV (pixrei 77 TroXts 
^0rt, Kal 6 avdpwTros (pvaei TTO\I.TLKOV ^wp^as 
interpreted by Aristotle, implies (i) that 
social organization is not a violation of 
nature, (2) that the TroXts differs from the 
ot /ct ct in something more than size, (3) 
that existing institutions are capable of 
improvement, (4) that there is a form or 
type or end towards which they may be 
improved. It is plain that the exposition 
of this dogma appropriately holds a 
prominent place in the introduction to a 
work which has for its main purpose the 
development of a scheme of the normal 
TroXts " (Jackson). 

3 6 airoXis KT\] "He who is cut 

IO 2 



[I. 2. 9 

77 KpeiTTwv rj dvOpwTros (wcrTrep teal 6 ixj) QfjLijpov \oL$op7]0els (I) 

5 d<ppr)Ta>p dde/j-icrros dvecmos 

10 dfjia jap (fevcret TQLOVTOS Kal irdKe/Jbov eiriOv^r^), are irep 
av% a)v watrep ev Trerroi?. j SIOTI $e TTO\ITLKOV ^wov o av- 10 
^pcoTro? TrdcrTjs /jie\iTT7]s Kal TravTos d^eKaiov %(/>ov ///aAAoz/, 

9 $r)\ov. ovSev yap, w? <f>a/Aev, /mdrrjv 77 (frvcris Troiel \6yov 

11 Se IJLOVOV avOpwiros e^et TWV %<pu>V rf f^ev ovv (frajvrj rov 

6 [yap] Schmidt || [/cat] Spengel partly recognising the fault in the ordinal- 
construction: that waTrep...7ri6v^Tr]s is parenthetical was first shown by Jackson 
(Journal of Philology VII. 1877, p. 236 ff. ); see Comm. || are irep omitted 
by L s , erased in U b || are irep...^ TrerroTs transposed to follow 29 deos Schmidt || 
7 av wv omitted by U b W b L s ; with vacant space left, by P 3>6 QM b Aid. and ist 

hand of P 2 Q b S b T b V b ; d> vrerrots omitted by Ar., tav by R b and P 4 (ist hand); 

av wi> was inserted by P 3 (corr. 3 ), av by a later hand in Q b S b and by a later hand 
in the margin of T b , dvev vyou rvy~x.avwv V b (a later hand), avev fyyov Tvyx&wv C 4 
also, avev frevyovs Bas. 2 || Trerots M b , Treretfots P and p 1 in the margin, yp. Treretvots 
P 4 (corrector) in the margin, and a later hand in the margin of S b || faov after o 

n 2 Bk. 

(Arist. Stndien in. 5), that the lover of 
domestic strife is clanless lawless hearth- 
less; not, that the outlaw or broken man 
or rover is pugnacious and aggressive. 
The right sense can be secured by a mere 
change of punctuation. The parentheti 
cal sentence refers by way of illustration to 
Homer s TTO\/JLOV eiridv/A riTris eir idrj/j-iov 
who is a (pvaec roiouros, i.e. an aTroXts 
<pvo-ei, in whom to the unsociable charac 
ter is superadded an inclination to war. 
Aristotle does not say that the dVoXts is 
always or commonly aggressive ; thus there 
is no reason for regarding aggression as a 
characteristic of the dl> (Jackson). Su- 
SEM. (24) (25) 

SLOTL here, like 6 rt, "that." 

SIOTI 8e -iroAiTiKov] De hist, anini. I. 
1 . 12: 7roXtri/cd 5 ^crrt fya uv ev n /cat 
KOLVOV ylverai TTCWTUV TO pyov, oirep ov 
TraVra Trote? a7eXata. Not all gregarious 
animals form a community, but those 
which, like bees, wasps, ants, cranes, and 
lastly man, are engaged upon some com 
mon work (Eaton). SUSEM. (25 b) 

9 For parallel passages consult Zeller 
II ii 424 n. (3); for Aristotle s teleology, 
ib. 422 428, 488497. 

11 On the physiological distinction 
between fywvi] mere voice, articulate 
speech, and X67os rational language, see 
De hist. anim. IV. 9. 536 a 20, b 8 ff., 
Probl. x. 39, 895 a 7 ff., Poet. 20 2, 
1456 b 22 ff. (TTOixeiov 
ov TrdVa 5e dXX e 775 

off from civil society by nature, and not 
by chance, is either low in the scale of 
humanity, or above it (as is also he whom 
Homer reproachfully described as clan- 
less lawless hearthless ; for he", not the 
aTroXts, but 6 u0 0/J<ripov \oi5opri6eLs, "is 
at once naturally unsociable and pugna 
cious) being in fact solitary, like the 
blot at backgammon" (Jackson). 

10 7 av] From an epigram of 
Agathias (AntlioL Pal. ix. 482, esp. 20 
28) Gottling De loco quodam Arts. (Jena 
1858) showed that au nearly resembles 
the blot of our backgammon an ex 
posed piece as contrasted with pieces 
guarded or supported, i.e. standing close 
together *. Bernays in his translation and 
Mahaffy (Academy Jan. 8, 1876) take dv 
to mean a rover , /. e. a piece with special 
powers of aggression ; but this is incon 
sistent with Agathias epigram. More 
over they mistake the sense of the quota 
tion from Iliad IX. 63, 64, where e/cetVos 
os TroA^uou tparai eTriS^tou otcpvoevros is 
the subject of which d<ppiJTwp dOt/micrTos 
aveffTios are predicates. What Homer 
really says is, as Spengel rightly saw 

* Whether TroAets was a name for this game or 
not, the TraVTroAAai TioAei? of Plato Rep. iv. 422 E 
(cp. the scholion) makes it likely that a compact 
body of pieces was called woAis ; if an isolated 
piece was called aTroAt?, Aristotle s allusion would 
be specially appropriate. Oncken, n. 27 f., has 
misunderstood Agathias epigram and Gottling s 
dissertation no less than the present passage 

I. 2. 13] 

1253 a 41253 a 21. 


Kal \v7rijpov eVrt o-rjiJielov, SLO Kal TO?? aXXoi? virdp- (I) 

y a P T VTOV TI Averts avrwv kr)\v6e, rov 
\VTrrjpov real T^Seo? KOI ravra arnjbaiveiv\ 
14 a XX^Xot?), o Se Xtfyo? eVl TCO Sr)\ovv ecm TO av^epov /call 
12 TO _J3\al3ep6v, ware KOI TO SiKaiov Kal TO CI^LKOV rovro ydprti 
TTpos rd d\\a fco<z Tot? dvOpooTrois ibiov, TO JJLOVOV dyaOov 
Kal tca/cov Kal Sifcaiov Kal d$t,Kov Kal rwv d\\a)v 
e^eiv rj Se TOVTWV Koivwvia TroieL o IK lav Kal TTO^LV. 
19 Kal Trporepov Se rfj (f)vcri vroXt? rj OLKia Kal eKacrros rjf 
13 (TTLV. TO yap b\ov nrporepov dvayKalov euvai TOV yu-epof? avai- (P- 4) 
pov/Aevov yap rov o\ov OVK ecrrai TTOU? ouSe ^ip, el yu-r) OJJLW- 

ii \V7Ttjpov Kal rideos (?}5eu>s P 6 U b and ist hand L s ) II 2 Bk. || e<m (rrjfjie iov... 13 
These words are wanting in Q Q b R b (where t stands in the margin) S b T b and 
V b (rst hand; added by a later hand) || 12 e\y\vOev W b Aid. Bk. wporjXOev P 4 - 6 M b 
U b L s || rov exw aiue-rjcnv] wore alffddveaOai rov P 4 6 M b U b W 1 L s Aid. Bk. || 
14 8r/\oui>] SteXetV ? Oncken, wrongly || 18 rovrwv] ruv roiovrwv Schmidt || 19 Kal 
7rp6repov... 2() 6eos transposed to follow 1252 b 27 de<2v Schmidt. See his arrange 
ment Introd. p. 97 || <5e Schneider, 5?) F II Bk. 

velopment appears imperfect, 6 Xws 5 
(paiverai TO yi.vop.evov dre\es Kal evr apx^l 1 
lov, (jouTe TO T?/ yeveffei. vcrTepov Trj 0i <m 
irpoTepov elvai. See below ill. i. 9, nor 
mal constitutions are prior to the di 
vergent, imperfect types. SUSEM. (27) 
Other passages in Grant Ethics I. 239. 

13 20 dvaipo\)p.vou KT\] "for 
if the whole body" except the foot or 
hand "is destroyed, there will be neither 
foot nor hand, except in an equivocal 
sense such as that in which we call the 
hand of a statue a hand ; because a hand 
in such circumstances" i.e. after the de 
struction of the rest of the body, "will be 
spoilt for use," cp. 5 5 ev TO?S K.O.TO. 
(pvcnv e^ofdi, Kal fj.r/ ev TO?? diecpdap- 
[j.evois, "and all things are defined by 
their function and faculty, so that things 
which are incapable of exercising their 
functions and faculties (^/ceri Totairra = 
HrfKeTi evepya Kal dvvara,*) must not be 
said to be the things in question, but to 
be equivocally called by their names" 
(Jackson). Cp. Manu II. 157 : as an 
elephant of wood, as an antelope of lea 
ther, so is a Brahmin unread in the Vedas. 
These three bear the name (Postgate). 

If the text is correct, the above ex 
planation, in which Hayduck and Jack 
son independently agree, must be 

* " Such as they were before, when they 
formed part of the whole and fulfilled their 
functions" (Cope). See the quotations n. (28). 

Kal yap r&v Or/ptwv elfflv 
dBiaiperoi (f>wvai. SUSEM. (26) 

15 TO SiKaiov governed by dyXovv : 
and therefore also (for the purpose of 
signifying) justice. 

12 16 irp6s = whcn compared with. 

aYQ-Gox) Kal KO.KOV alV0T|criv] moral per 
ception, N. Eth. II. 9. 8 ; iv. 5. 13, ev Ty 
ala6r](Ti rj Kpiffis : not to mention passages 
in Bk. VI ; as 1 1 4 TOVTUV ovv Zxew Set 
afodrjo iv, avTT) 5 ecrrt vovs. 

1 8 r\ 8 TOIJTCOV K.] An objective geni 
tive with Kowuvia as in III. 9. 12 AC. 
rb-rrov, fellowship in goodness and 
justice . The city is regarded as a 
moral or spiritual society, church and 
state in one. 

19 Kal Trpdrepov 8e TTJ <j>ii<ri,] It is 
not in order of time yeve&ei (in which 
sense N. Eth. vm. 12. 7, quoted on 5 
above, asserts the direct contrary), but in 
order of thought and of real existence 
0u<m, Kara <f>v<nv, T< et 5et, rfj ovcria, that 
the state is prior to the family and to the 
individual. On this distinction see esp. 
Metaph. I. 8 37 989 a 15 ff.: ix(0). 
8. 8 1050 a 3 ff . rj evtpyeia irportpa rrjs 
dwd/j-ews (the__iajized and actual pre- 
cedes_the_ pjossibleJTaTa ytveviv Kal xpb~ 
vov. dXXa /u.7)i> Kal ovvia ye, Trp&rov fj.kv 
OTI Ta rrj yevtffei varepa ry eiSet Kal rrj 
ovffia Trpbrepa olov dvrjp TratSos TO /j.t> 
yap -rjdr) ?x i T elSos, rb S ovl Phys. VIII. 
7. 12, 261 a 14 what is in process of de- 



14 vvfJia. 

nOAITIKON A. 2. [I. 2. 13 

wairep el n<$ \e<yei rrjv \i9ivr]i> ia<f)6ap<~lcra ( <ydp earai (I) 
, rrdvra Be ra> 6/070) wpia-rai Kal rfj Bwapei, ware 
roiavra ovra ov \eicreov rd avrd elvai aXX O/JLCO- 
ori fjuev ovv r/ 7roXt9 teal (frixrei, [/cal] Trporepov rj efca- 12 
$rj\ov el ydp vT /L67) -avrdpicris e/cacrros %GO pier dels, 6//,ot&)9 
fjLepecnv e^ei Trpos TO oXoz^, o 8e ur) Bvvc vo9 
57 ///7?Sei> Seo/jievos $i avrdp/ceiav , ovBev yu /oo9 

15 / (f)vo~ei fjuev ovv 
av o $e TrpojTO? 

ev iracriv eTrl TTJV TOLavrrjv KOIVWVL- 
dyaOatv alno^. wcrTrep <yap 


Bk. 2 and Susem. - 1 following P 2 and perhaps F || dXXo, 0^ape?cra 
Bender, apparently with the following construction: Xidivrjv, dXXd ((pOapelaa yap) 
crrat rotai/rT?- Trdvra : hardly right || <ou/c> ^<rrat Rud. Scholl (Comm. de legg. 
. Bonn 1865, p. 43) which is not improbable: unless we are to bracket the words 
Siafpdapelaa yap e<TTai Totavrtj. But see Comm. and Quaest. Cr. ill. 3 ff., IV. 3 ff. || 23 
< 77 > Totaur?7 ? Jackson || de] yap F apparently, adopted by Bender rightly, if we 
accept his conjecture or reject 5ia<pd. KT\ || 25 /cat omitted before (pvo-ei in II 1 and 
Paris. 963 || /cat omitted before trpbTepov by P 2 Ar. || -rrpoTepa FP 6 QM b T b U b 

^**<ArhTs i -D4 4 p(jJ QbJ^bgb || 2 g ^^V II 2 Bk. fJL T)8eV( 

3 r irp&Tov P 4 -e- Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b V b L 8 

V b L s , 7 
[ 2 Bk. 

P 4 , 
P 1 

F Ar. 


accepted : dia^Oapelcra must be, 
Hay duck thinks, equivalent to rou 
effTeprjaevr] /cat TT?S dwd/mews : "in such a 
if-ise the hand and the foot are really de- 
*^*^p*r1ved of their force. But the essential 
nature of an object consists in its function 
> and in its capacity to execute that func 

tion ; so that where it no longer possesses 
the appropriate quality it can no longer 
be said to be the same, but only to bear 
the same name". But the parallel pas- 
* sages De gener. anim. I. 19. 7 726 b 22 ff. 

ov8 yap 77 %etp oi)S d XXo TWV fj.opiwv 
**/} . ovSev dvev I/ I XT^S T; dXXrjs TWOS dwd/neus 
IJ.bpi.ov ov9ev, dXXa udvov 
42, 734 b 24 ff. ov yap ecrTi 

i;/ Xex^7?cT6Tat r6 fJiev 
TO S crdp^, Coffirep Kav el 
eylyveTO \i0iva 77 v\iva ; De anima II. 
i. 9 412 b iSff. oi/ ews 775 aVoXet7roi;(r77s 
OVK eo~Ti.v o(f>6a\fj.6sj TT\TJV 6fj,<j}vvfj.o}s, /ca- 
^aTrep o \t6ivos Kal 6 yeypa/ Meteor. 
IV. 12. 3, 390 a 10 ff. d-rravTO. 5 e<TTii> 
(Jopi<JIJ.eva Thj epytg TO, fj.ev ydp 
TroLetv Tb avTwv epyov dXyOus e<rTiv ef/cacrra, 
olov 6 6(f>da\fws el opa, TO de /J.TJ dwduevov, olov 6 TeOvews rj 6 \idivos lead 
to the conclusion that diaipdapelaa is sub 
ject and TotauTT? is predicate. If so, and 
if TotaivT77 = a true hand, the sense requires 
the insertion of the negative, although 

ccrrt %etp ov 
b/ji(j3vv/ui,ov : II. 

we should then expect aXXa irdvTa rather 
than irdvTa de : "for a hand thus rendered 
useless <no longer> has the qualities of a 
hand, whereas the definition of every ob 
ject is contained in its function." OJJLCOVV- 
P.WS] Cp. in. i. 7 n. (438 b). SUSEM. (28) 

14 26 xwpurBefe] cut off from society, 
living in isolation, HOVUTTJ yap %aXe7roy 6 
/Stos. Comp. the discussion in JV. Eth* 
IX. c. 9 showing that friends are indis 
pensable to Wellbeing : derjaei Tig evdai/j.o- 
vrjffovTL (f)i\0}v cnrovoaitev . . .77 TavTy evdeyjs 
^crrat, i.e. not aurdp/cTjj. 

6[j.otojs TOLS dXXois ^i KT\] will be 
related to the state as any other part to 
the whole of which it is a part : i. e., 
13, will be relative and subordinate to it, 
will be vaTepov not Trpbrepov. 

29 T| 0T]p{oV T|| 0OS] SO 9 r/TOl 0ttuXoS 

77 KpelTTUv TI avOpwiros. JV. Eth. v. 9. 
17 with Jackson s note, rots aev yap OVK 
eariv inrep[3o\T] (TUV dir\ws dyaOuv) olov 
tcrws Tols Beols, TOis 5 ovdev fj,6piov t60At- 
/J.QV, rots dwdrws /cao?s, so that the sphere 
of particular justice is restricted to human 
society: ib.Vll. i. 2 wvirep ovoe Oypiove ffTiv 
Kaxla ovS 1 dpeTrj, OVTWS ovoe 6eov. 

15 31 68^ irpwros KT\] Cp. In- 
trod. 24, and notes on II. 9 8 (288), 
12 (296), 14 (300). SUSEM. (28 b) 

oio-ircp -yctp KT\] "Both the grammar 
and the sense of TeXewdev and 

I. 3. 1] 

1253 a 22 1253 b 1. 



1253 b 

KOI Te\ew6ev fteXricrTov TWV ^(j>wv o avOpwTros earns, OVTCO teal (I) 

vofjiov ical Sl/cys ^eipio-TOv TTUVTWV. ^aXeTrcordrrj yap 
e^oucra ovrXa o Se avOpwiros oTrXa e^wv fyverai <j)pov?j- 
35 o~L KOI apery, ot? eirl rdvavria ecm XpfjaOai /u/aXtcrra. 816 dv- A^ 

KOI dypiwTarov avev dperr/^ real 77730? dtppoSlo-La 
e$co$r)v ^eipiO Tov. ry Be 8i/caiocrvvr/ iroXLTitcov T/ yap Sltcy f " 

KOLV(Ovla<5 rdi<> ecmv [y Se Slier) rov SlKdiOV tcpla is]. 
etrel 8e (pavepov ef wv fJbQpiwv 77 TroXt? <rvvecrTr]Kev, li 

32 [reXeutih] and 33 [x^ptffd^v vb^ov KO! diK-rjs] Jackson || reXew^eis and 33 ^w- 
picrffeis Spengel || o wanting in II 2 Bk., but inserted in the margin of P 4 || 35 
apery ? clue to 36 dperr??, having displaced a word like r^x v V Freudenthal (cp. 
Met. I. r. 6 p. 980 b 27 f.) or Kaprepig. Susem. ; not pwri Lindau, dp^eL Hampke, 
nor dpyy Schmidt: hardly Kpdrec Schnitzer. [(ppoi>TJ<rei KO.I apery] Conring Madvig, 
[/cat apery] Schneider, <e?rt> <f>povqffet /cat apery Welldon, * * (fipovycrei Thurot, 
/cat aperyv Reiske (this makes bad worse, Montecatino protested against it), 
/car apery? Oncken. See Susem. Qiiaest. Crit. II. 5f., IV. 5 f . || 38 [77... 
s] Hampke, [Ski;] Spengel || 8iKy] 5iKai.o<rvi>y Reiske Thurot 

vbuov /cat SiKys appear strange, and 26 
Xwpi&deis is used in a different connexion" 
(Jackson). Spengel (and lately Ridgeway) 
would make the participles masculine. 
But the concord is not too harsh ; at 
fortasse, ut saepius, liberiore construc- 
tione utitur Aristoteles (Susem.). For 
the thought, Plato Laws 765 E, Trai/ros yap 
dy <f)VTQv y Trpury (3\affry /caXws opuydeTva 
TT/SOS dperyv rys avrov 0ucrecos Kupitiirdry 
eiri.Qe ivai. TO Trpo<T(popov...Kal 

t/cafws 5e y fj.y /caXwj rpa<pe 
oiroaa 0i et yy. 

16 34 6 8 KT\] Man is born with 
weapons to be used by (i.e. to subserve) 
wisdom and virtue ; weapons which ai~e, 
however, especially liable to abuse (Mon 
tecatino) : (ppovyvei the dative of reference 
(Jackson). Most editors make it causal 
or instrumental. "But (i) what can 
weapons for practical wisdom and virtue 
mean ? Hardly weapons for the exercise, 
but rather such as serve for the attain 
ment, of these qualities. Yet dSixfa. 
Zxovcra oTrXa shows that the former are 
meant. (2.) It is essential to the thought 
that we should learn whence man, of all 
creatures, gets these dangerous double- 
edged weapons, so eminently adapted for 
purposes mutually opposed (rd^ai/rta), for 
good and for evil. Whereas that they 
are for good needs not be stated : Aris 
totle s teleological standpoint implies it." 
SUSEM. Cp. Rhet. i. i 13 (Spengel). 

37 r\ 8i SIKCUOO-VVT] iroXiriKov KT\] 

III. 10. 2 oi 5e TO dl.Kai.ov TroXews (f>Oapri.Kov. 
SUSEM. (28 c) 

Jackson keeping the last clause y Sc 
8itcy KT\ (which he holds to be a paren 
thetical explanation of 5iKy in y yap SiKy 
KT\, rightly placed last in a Greek sen 
tence) would translate: "now justice be 
longs to a state", i.e. can be found only 
in a 7r6Xts, " 5li<y or the administration of 
law which is the determination of what 
is just being a regulation of the political 
community." Cp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 4 y 
yap diKy Kpiffis rov diKaiov /cat TOU dSt /cou 
ff. with Jackson s notes. 

c. 3 Economic lias three parts treating 
of tJic relationships which iake ttp the 
household, (i) 5ea"7roriKy (2) ya/j.iKy 
(3) TrarpiKy : i, 2. The relation of (4) 
XpyuanariKy to economic is obscure: 
3. Upon 5eo"7roTLKy, which we take 
first, there are widely divergent vieius 4. 
Roughly speaking the rest of the book 
treats of (T) de<nroriKy in cc. 4 7, (4) 
Xpy^o-TLffTLKy in cc. 8 11, (2) and (3) in 
cc. 12, 13. 

c. 4 The household needs implements 
which may be animate or inanimate : 
such an implement is called a chattel 
(Kry/u,a), and is irpaKTiKbv, for use 
not for production : i 4. The thrall 
(Kry/m,a e^^vxov} defined^ 5, 6. 

c. 5 But are there any persons answer 
ing to this definition, (fivcrei dov\ot? I 
As it is advantageous to both and to each, 
and therefore just and natural that body 
should be subject to soul, appetite to reason, 

152 nOAITIKHN A. 3. [I. 3. 1 

dvayxalov irptoTov irepl olfcovo/^ia^ elirelv Traaa yap crvy- (II) 

TToXt? e OLKIWV. OifCOVOfJLiaS $6 f^ep TJ, % &V TTClKlV Y] OLKLa 

ol/cla Se reXeto? etc &ov\a)v /cal e\evOepo)i . e vrel 
5 S eV rot? e\a%i(7TOis irpwrov ercacrTOv ^TjrTjreoi 1 , Trpwra * 
Kal eXd^HTTa uepr/ ol/cla^ SecrTroT??? /cal SoDXo? /cal TTOC , 
teal aXo^o? /cal Trarrjp /cal re/cva, Trepl rpiwv TOVTCOV o-fce- 
2 Trreov civ itj rj e/cao-rov Kal TTOIOV el_elvai. ravra 8 eVrl 2 
SecrTTOTi/cr) /cal ya/At/cr) (dvcovv/AOV yap rj yvvaiKOS Kal av- 
crufeu^?) Kal rpirov Trarpi/crj (/cal ydp avrrf OVK 
Sla) ovo/nart). ecrTwcrav $rj avrai, rpet? a? elVo- 
3 /ji6v. ecrTi 8e TL [fiepos] o So/eel TO?? uev elvai ol/covojjLia, 

1253 b 2 dvdyK-rj P 4 - fi - Q M b U b W b L s Aid, while Q b R b (which has however f in 
the margin) S b T b and V b (ist hand) omit dvayKafov...^ <rvvi<rTt)Ktv (a later hand has in 
serted the words in the margin of V b ) || Trepl oiKovo/jiias (oiVas 15k. 2 following the 
mss. used by Accoromboni and Sepulveda) elirelv irpbrepov P 4 6 Q M b U b W b L B Aid. 

Bk. in place of irpurov direiv \\ ffvyKeirai. after 3 OIKIUV P 4l<;> Q M b U b L s Aid. 

Bk. H 3 olKovo(j.ia.s\ oldas F P 4 - e< Q M b U b L H Bk. Bernays |] iraXiv r/ oiKia T 
apparently, 7rd\w okta P 2>3> C 4 and a later hand in V 1 , rj oiKia iraXiv ]\P P 1 . au^ts owa 
P 4 -<5- Q M b U b W b L s Aid. Bk. || 4 o-wArT^ei/] arnVrarac P 4 Q M b U b W b L s Aid. 
Bk. || 5 TT/Dwroi ] </cat> TrpuTOLs Bender || 7 TOVTWV ffK7TT^ov after 8 ap II 2 Bk. 
|| 9 /cat is wanting before ya/jn.Krj in M. s M b || 10 Trarpt/o? Ar. apparently (cp. c. 12 

i), TeKvoiroL-riTiK-f) Bk. following P and the mss. (\V b Aid. omit avdovv^ov re/ci/o- 

Troi^riK^), TeKvoiroitKri Dindorf (Steph. Thes.): irarpiK fi was abbreviated TrpT/c?/; this 
became TTOU/CT) or Trot^ri/c^, and was then wrongly emended || u ST) Susem. 2 , 5 P II 
Ar. Bk. || 12 5 rt or 5^ rt <en> Susem., 5 <5 > rt : i.e. Se <r 
ri (after first suggesting 3 e rt <r^rapr6i/> n) Schmidt, probably right 
Zeller (Phil. d. Gr. II ii 693 n. 4, ed. 3) 

5, 6, &.Y7.T/.5 1 /o man, female to mah, 7, The ot/ctas /w^, as enumerated just after- 
so it is better (i.e. n advantageous and wards, are the three pairs of relation- 
just) that a man whose function is bodily ships <rufei as (or, 2 5, Koivwvlai). 
service, who is a mere adjimct of another, 4 eirel 8* ev TOIS eX. KT\] by the 
should be subject to his superior in ex- method noticed i 3 ., 8 i ., Hi. i. 2 
cettence0fsoul,8,(). Nature designs to n. (434). SUSEM. (29) 
mark this distinction upon the bodies of tJie 5 irpwra] The aavvdeTa of r 3. 
two, but does not always succeed: 10, 1 1. 2 9 yafUKr)= conjugal , TrarpiKrj = 

On the question of slavery cc. 3 7, paternal relationship: senses obviously 

consult Tntrod. pp. 24 26, the excellent more precise than the ordinary use of the 

dissertation of L. Schiller Die Lehre des terms warranted. Thus 77 ya/MKrj 6fjii\ta, 

Arts, von der Sklaverei (Erlangen 1847. tne marriage union, iv(vn). 16 I 

4),Hildenbrand0/>.r.395 4o6,Onckenii. simply cohabitation. Schneider thinks 

29 74, Becker and Hermann Charikles ai>5pLKr],Gd\.tYmg7ro<TLaKr)(sic) would better 

in. i 12, Eng. tr. 356 373. SUSEM. express the former relation from the side 

c. 3 1 1253 b 3 oiKovop-ias 8e KT\] In of the stronger analogously to deo TroriKij, 

his lax manner Aristotle means "the or Latin maritalis. Strictly 7rarpi/c6s=: 

partsof Economic" or household-manage- hereditary, as e.g. in in. 14. 6: but in 

ment ^correspond to those of which the Nic. Eth. v. 6. 8, vm. 10. 4 it is used, 

household consists". This at least gives as here, for paternal , 
better sense than to read ot /a as : see 12 i. 

I. 4. 1] 

1253 b 2 1253 b 23. 



tz>a ra re 
TO elbevai 

&e fjueryia-Tov fjuepos avT^ OTTO)? S 

Xe<y&) Se Trept T?7? KCL\OV /jievijs ^pr^/jiaTLcrTLfcrj^. 
15 TTpwrov Se ?rept SecrTrorou KOI Sov\ov 

Trpo? r?)^ dvay/calav %peiav LSco^ep, KOV el TL 

Trepl CLVT&V Svval/jieda \af3etv j3e\TLov TWV vvv i>7ro\a/ji/3avo- 
4 fievcov. TO?? /u,ei> yap SoKei e 7^0-^7^77 re Tt? elvai 77 Se<T7roTet a, 3 

/cat 77 avrt] ol/covo/jila /cal Se&TroTela teal TroXtTt/c?) /cat /Sa- 

20 (7L\iKt^ KaOc lTTep CLTTO/jLeV dp^OjJLGVOi TOt? Se TTdpd (f)V(TlV TO 

Seo"7roetzA vo^w <ydpJrov fjiev 8ov\ov eivai TOP & e\ev6epov, 
(f)vcr6L & ovSev Siafyepeiv. Siojrep ov8e SiKatov fBicuov <ydp. 
4 eirel ovv T; tcr^cris /u-epo? TT;? ol/cias earl [/cal 77 KT^TLKT) 4 

15 [5e] Schmidt, who transposes irpuTov [5e] ...... 1256 a i rpoirov (cc. 3 3 7 

5) to follow 1259 a 39 (c. 12 l): see Introd. p. 97 || 17 Swa^da. M" P 1 
C 4 , 8vvr]ff6/j.0a T (?) Susem. 1 2 , foteriwiis William || 23 e?ret o5^] eiTro/Jiev oZv <OTL> 
Schmidt || [/cat ...... 24 ot/coi o/xtas] Suscm. On 23^33 cp. Suscm. Qit. Cr. II. 7 ff . 

3 13 TOIS 81 

9 12 18, ii 13. SUSKM. (29 b) 

15 i va KT\] first in order to observe 
what has a direct bearing upon practical 
use, and secondly for our theory, to ascer 
tain any facts which may enable us to im 
prove upon the views at present held . 

4 20 KdOdirep el/Trophy KT\] i 2 f . 
cp. 7 i nn. SUSEM. (30) 

TOIS 81 irapd <|>iJGriv] Comp. below 
6 i foil, with nn. The only representa 
tive of this view of whom we have certain 
knowledge was the rhetorician Alkidamas 
of Elaia, a disciple of Gorgias (see ill. 2. 
2 .), who gave expression to it in his 
Messenian speech delivered on behalf 
of Messene after its restoration by Epami- 
nondas, in order to overcome the ob 
stinate refusal of the Spartans to recognize 
the new state : e\ev9povs a<prJKe iravra^ 
6ebs, ovdeva 6ov\ov 77 (pi/crts TreiroifjKev, 
Aristot. Rhct. I. 13. 3, with scholiast. 
Compare Spengel (ll. 179) [and Cope] 
on that passage : and esp. Vahlen Der 
Rhetor Alkidamas (Vienna 1864. 8). 14 ff. 
Possibly (see 7 3 n.) Aristotle was ac- 
quainted with the lines of the comic poet 
Philemon (Fragtn. inc. xxxiv Meineke, 

> Meineke s ed. p. 410) KW 5ou\6s ecrn, 
lx ec - I ^vcra. yap ouSels 
OT \ 77 5 a5 TVX.TI rb 
<riofj.a ^areouwcraro. SUSEM. (31) 

Zeller Socrates p. 322 n. 3 is inclined 
to attribute this view to the Cynics. 

21 v6|JLa)...<|>u<ri.] On this famous anti 
thesis of the conventional and the natu 
ral see Sofh. Elcnch. 13 6 173 a 7 ff., 




Grant Ethics i. 149 151, and esp. Sidg- 
wick Journal of Philology v. 73 77. 

22 Sioirep KT\] Wherefore slavery 
(rb 5e<T7r6fciv) is unjust also, as resting on 
mere force (Wyse). 

c. 4 1 23 r\ KTTJTLKT] = the theory of 
the acquisition of property. Gottling and 
Bernays in a more general sense, the 
theory of property ; and certainly with 
this rendering the words in brackets 
would fit better into the context. But in 
what follows KTrjTLK-r] everywhere denotes 
the same thing as xP" r }f MTia TtK ^ m the 
wider sense, the science or art of 
acquiring wealth, first introduced 3 3, 
see 8 i n. Property, as being indis 
pensable for living, belongs to the house 
hold : hence by analogy it follows that 
every chattel is an instrument for the 
householder s use, and that the slave is 
an animate instrument of this kind. But 
from the fact that the theory of acqui 
sition or even the theory of property is a 
part of the science of household manage 
ment, no such conclusion follows, even 
when taken in connexion with the first 
premiss, which is sufficient of itself to 
prove it in the manner indicated above. 
Besides, the words bracketed anticipate 
the decision which at 3 3 is distinctly 
postponed to c. 8, and the way in 
which the question is raised 8 i pre 
supposes that no such decision by anti 
cipation has yet been given. The state 
ment made here does not agree with the 
results of cc. 8 n ; for not the whole 
theory of property and its acquisition, 



[I. 4. 1 

(dvev yap TWV dva^Kaiwv dftvparov (II) 
25 /cal ^rjv Kal ev &v) cocnrep Srj rat? wpicr /sevens re%vai$ 
dvayrcalov civ eiy virdp^eiv rd ol/ceia opyava, el /uieX\ei 
2 dTroreX.eo drjo ecrOai TO epyov, [OVTCO KOL rat OLKOVO/JUKO)] TWV 
& opydvcov rd fnev d-^rv^a rd Se e^^rv^a (olov ru> K 
6 ^ev oial; atyvyov 6 Be 7rpa)pevs e^tyv^ov 6 

30 vTTTjpeTTj^ ev opydvov eiSei rals Te^yais earriv), OVTCO KOI <TO> 

olKOVOfJLLKW>> TO ICTTJ fJLd OpJCtVOV 7T/90? ^GOIJV 6(7Tt, Kal Tj KT?j(7l<> 

25 Kal ev ^wanting in FM S and P 1 (first hand, added in the margin) || 677 
Susem., 5t H 1 P 2 -3- C 4 M b , 5 ev Q Q b R b S b T b V b Bk. ; wanting in P 4 - 6 - U b W b L 8 Aid. 
Hence [5] Susem. 1 - 2 || 26 /xAXot Koraes and perhaps F || 27 r<$ OLKOVO/J,LK^] 
ruv oiKovofuicuv P 2 3 6 Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b W b L 8 Aid. Bk., with a later hand in C 4 
and the rst hand in V b (the dative in V b by a later hand) ; [oi/Vw /cat T^> OI /COPO/U/COJ] 
and 30 ourw Kal <r$ olKovofj.LK<$> Rassow Susem. Thurot once proposed to omit 
30 ourw /cat and transpose 27 ourw /cat ...... 30 ecrrtV to follow 31 tarl || 31 [17... 

...32 ecrrt, /cat] Schmidt 

but only as much of it as relates to the 
natural part concerns ot/coi/o/it/c??, and 
that only indirectly. My defence of the 
words, Rhein. Mus. xx. 510, is exposed 
to objections not then foreseen : it would 
seem that this is an un-Aristotelian in 
terpolation. SUSEM. (32) 

24 d vu Y^P KT M Cp- 2 8 n. (21). 
Mere life, bare existence, ffiv, is of course 
the immediate end of the household and 
of household management : good life or 
well-being, eiT fa, is the end which the 
state has in view : but indirectly the state 
and its end is the end of the household 
2 2 9. Consequently we find that side 
of oiKovo/uia, which is directed towards 
securing the fitness of those belonging to 
the household, and so towards the per 
fecting of life, ranked above the use 
and preservation of property, or the side 
which is directed to mere living, 13 in. 
SUSEM. (33) 

25 TCUS wpurp^vais r^x.vais=the arts 
which form distinct professions : as the 
craftsmen of a particular trade-guild must 
be provided with suitable tools &c. Ber- 
nays. In any case the phrase means the 
arts properly so called ; immediately be 
low they are termed productive or creative 
(TrotT/cris, TroirjTiKa opyava 4 with n.) as 
contrasted with the merely practical ac 
tivities to which Economic and the art of 
life belong. According to Aristotle these 
productive arts are to be subdivided into 
(i) the useful, and (2) the imitative or 
fine arts . In the sphere of prac 
tice the end lies in the activities them 
selves, evtpyeiai : in the sphere of the 

arts, in certain definite special products, 
fyya, distinct from the activities which 
produce them : Nic, Eth. I. i. 2, 1094 a 
3 f., 5ta0opd 5^ rts 0atVerat TWV re\wv 
ra JJL^V yap el<nv evtpyeiai, ra 5 Trap 
auras pya riva, I. I. 5 1094 a 16 Sia<ppeL 
5 ov5ei> ras evepyeias auras efrat ra rA.?; 
rwv Trpa^ewv rj irapa rai ras d XAo rt, /ca$a- 
irep 7rt rQiv \^Qei(jQ>v ^Tri(jrt]^wv , II. 4. 3 
1105 a 26, VI. 2 5 1139!) 2, II. 5. 3 
1140 b 3, 6. In conformity with this dis 
tinction Schlosser prefers to explain 
wptcr/^i ats T. as arts restricted to de 
finite distinctive ends. But can this be 
expressed by the one word wptoT^rats ? 
Fiilleborn wavers between this explana 
tion and his own, which makes top. r^x- = 
definite special arts )( the one all-em 
bracing art of life. But conduct or the 
art of life even if we include in it the 
perfecting of life embraces at the most 
only the practical activities ; and from 
what has been said it follows that the 
technical or productive activities, TroiTjcris, 
would be excluded from it. Cp. also iv 
(vn). 3. 3 n. SUSEM. (34) 

2 30 4v dp-yavov el Sei] is classed 
with, ranked under the head of, im 
plements : cp. rds ev u X^s et Set apxds 
Mcta, I. 3. 3 983 b 7, the material sort of 
causes; ev /mopiov eidei De Cado I. T. 7 
268 a 5. The same idiom frequently 
where eldos and the genitive are almost a 
paraphrase for the thing in question : vb- 
p.wv ^ /j.S.\\ov fldos TJ TroAirei as Pol. III. 
15. 2, cp. vi (iv). 6. 9 6\iyapxtas et5os. 

31 T<5 KTTjfjia 6 p"Ya,vov KT\] "the 
chattel is an instrument to aid him in 

I. 4. 4] 

1253 b 24 1254 a 2. 


opydvwv eVrt, /cal 6 SoOXo? /CTr)/J,d n e^v^ov. teal (II) 
3 UKTTrep opyavov irpo opydixov Tra? [o] vTryperij^. el yap tf$v- 5 

z>aro GKCLCTTOV T&V opydvwv K6\va0ev 77 TrpoaiaOavo^evov avro- 
35 reXet^ TO avrov epyov, wcrnrep rd AatSaXou (fracrlv rj TOJ)? TOV 

H^a/o-TOU T/HTroSa?, ou? (fryer iv 6 TTO^T?;? auroyu-arou? $etoz; 

[u7ro]Suea-#at dywva, ovrcos al KpKi$es e/cepKi&v aural /cat ra 

7T\fj/cTpa eiciOdpi^eVy ovSev av e Set cure rofc dp^iTe/crocriv 
4 inrrjperwv ovre rot? Se<77rorat9 $ov\wv. rd /jiev ovv \ey6fjieva 

I2 54 a ,/ \ ,/ / , \ \ / , v 

opyava TroirjTiKa opyava ecm, TO oe Kir^La TrpafCTi/cov CITTO 

32 [/cat] before 6 SoOXoj so that the apodosis begins here Thurot || 33 o wanting 
in M a , erased in P 4 || 34 Trpoaiadbnevov Koraes [| 35 avrov II || 37 dvecrdai. P 1 II- 
Bk. || ovTtos <eZ> Susem. 1 following William s translation sic si, OUTO; /cat Schmidt 
|| aurat only T and a later hand in C 4 : the rest have aurat. 

1254 a i [TCI /U&/...4 /J.QVOV] Schmidt 

living." But it is not true conversely 
that every instrument of use for living is 
a piece of property or chattel. The 
analogy of the distinctive crafts is against 
this ; for the helmsman s assistant is not 
his property, and the difference between 
the ends for which instruments are used 
in the two cases does not supply any 
reason for this distinction. See further 
i. 2 5^z., 6 10 . ^SUSEM. (35) 

33 6 p-yavov irp6 op-ydvwv] an imple 
ment superior to other implements; see 
7 3 and De part, animal. I v. 10. 2 1 687 a 
21 <rrt yap (sc. r/ %ep) wcrTrep ftpyavov 
irpb opyavwv. For this relation 5ov\os = 
/j.\f/vx.ov opyavov, 6pyavoi = a\l/vxos SouXos 
Eaton cites N. Eth. vui. n. 6 

3 35 Acu8d\ov] Not a real his 
torical personage, but only the legendary 
personification of the first prominent ad 
vance in Greek architecture and more 
especially in sculpture. Before him the 
human figure had been represented with 
the feet together, the arms joined to the 
body and the eyes shut. He first made 
the eyes look as if open, detached the arms 
from the sides, and showed the feet step 
ping apart (scholiast on Plato Meno 97 D, 
Suidas s. v. AatSciXoi; irotTf/xara). When 
contrasted with the archaic style his 
figures came to be praised for their 
illusive lifelikeness ; and this, or rather 
his choice of attitudes of motion and 
action for his figures, is all that is meant 
by the story to which Aristotle here al 
ludes, viz. that his figures moved as if 
alive and had to be chained to prevent 
their running away (Plato /. c.). See 
Brunn History of the Greek Artists I. 14 
23. SUSEM. (36) 

36 6 TroiT|Tiis] Homer Iliad xvin. 
376 6(ppa ot ai)r6yuarot delov Sucrat ar 
crywi a. SUSEM. (36 b) There 

is a similar ingenious fancy in Lytton s 
Coming Race. 

4 1 254 a 2 iroit\riKai=for production 
(of fresh utilities embodied in material 
objects), 7!7>a/crt/c6f for action = merely 
for ^lse t i.e. as we see from 8 2 the con 
sumption or utilization of commodities. 
In Political Economy consumption is 
either productive or improductive, and 
the definition of wealth will vary accord 
ing as we consider it from the producers 
or the consumers point of view : Mill I. 
c. 3, Sidgwick Principles I. c. 3 7. 

On the distinction here made between 
7rotT?crts and 7rpa|ts cp. nn. (34, 40) and 
Zeller op. c. II ii 164, 177 ff., 580, 586, 
652 ff. Consult also the special treatises 
Ed. Miiller History of the Theory^ of 
Art in Greece n. 38 ff., 374 ff., Teich- 
miiller Forschungen {Aristotelian Re 
searches] II. 12 62, Reinkens Aristotle 
on Art i 12, 169 179; Susemihl in 
the Jahrb. f. Philol. cv. 1872. 319 f., 
Rich. Schultz De poetices Aristoteleae 
principles (Berlin 1874.8), Walter Theory 
of Practical Reason in Gk. Philosophy 
(Jena 1874. 8) p. 80 ff., 245 f., 276 ff., 
296 ff., 504 ff. Oncken very 

justly remarks, op. c. n. 39 f., that even 
from Aristotle s own point of view we 
must be surprised at a conception of slave- 
labour so one-sided that even its capacity 
for production (i.e. of fresh objects of 
utility) is denied. " This could not be 
maintained in view of the fact that in the 
art and industry of Hellas the whole of 
the unskilled labour engaged upon the 

156 nOAITIKON A. 4. [I. 4. 4 

JAGV yap rrj<$ /cep/clSos erepov TL yiveTai irapd rrjv xprjaiv (II) 
avrfjs, diro Je rrjs eo-0rJTO<? KOI rfj<; K\ivi]s r] Xprjcrw fio- 
5 vov. en S eVet Sia^epei rj Troiycris eibei KOI tf Trpd^is, 6 
Kal Seovrcu d^orepai opydvcov, dvdyrci] Kal ravra rr)i> 

i 5 avrrjv % tz/ Sia(j)opdv. 6 Se (Bios Trpdfys, ov 

/ou 6 SouXo? VTTTjpeTTjs TWV TTOO? T^z/ 7rpa^y...^ ft (P- 

V ? v . , V V V / ?-**** v , 

TO oe KTTjfjia \eyeTai wairep KCLI TO /jbopiov. TO re yap /AG 
ou /JLOVOV aXXov eorTl ^opiov^ a\\a KCLI aTrXw? d\\ov 
Se /cal TO KTrjfJLa. 8to 6 yu/ez/ eo~7roT77? ToO 8oi;Xof 
fjiovov, e/ceivov 8 ou/c ecmv o Se SoOXo? ou JAOVOV 
oov\6<; ecrTiv, d\\d KOL oXco? e/celvov. 

/9 yLtez^ oi;^ 77 (frvcrLs TOV $ov\ov Kal T/? T; (HvvafJbis, etc TOVTWV 7 
^ (o 7/3 yLt?) avTov (pvo-et dXX a\Xou av6pW7ro<$ wv, OUTO? 
</>i;cret SouXo? e<7TtV, aXXof 8 eaTlv dvOpwrros, o? az^ KTrj/jia rj [Bov- 

5 5 wanting in M s and perhaps also in F, hence [5 ] Susem. 1 
P 2.3. C 4 W h Ar. Aid., S^oz/rat 5 P 4 6 Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b V b L s Bk. 
and p 2 (but epfj.rji>eia [sic] earl TOV oXws mg. 3 P 2 , i.e. a marginal note in dark yellow 
ink), cb-Aws SAcos M P 1 , 6 Aws all other sources Bk. Susem. 1 2 [| The clause 

15 6... 16 eo-rlv is noticed by Alexander of Aphrodisias on the Metaphys. p. 15, 
6 ed. Bonitz || 15 u>v II 1 Paris. 963 Alex, (apparently) and P 4 (corrector in margin), 
^ p2-6.QM b Q b R b S b T b U b V b W b L s Ar. Aid. Bk. and the ist hand in P 4 C 4 : no 
doubt also in P 3 (an erasure here), yp. 8e p 1 in margin, ecrrtz> a later hand in C 4 || 

16 aAA ouS P 1 6 - W b L 8 Aid., dAA ovdlv M s || 77 T M 8 || SoOAos ta-riv or Sov\os r, T 
apparently, dov\os &v M S C 4 and P 1 - 2 - 3 - Q M b ( ist hand), avdpwrros <$v SouAos wv P 4 , uvdpw- 

production of fresh utilities was performed aAAov fjv. 

exclusively by slaves, and thus the slave \i 6 S...o\ws tKetvou] Eth. Etid. 

in the great workshops and manufactories VII. 9. i 1241 b 19 ou yap du ecrriv 

was not merely an aid to the use or enjoy- (sc. SetrTror^s /cat SoCAos), aAAd TO /^^ ev, 

ment of the goods of life but indirectly a TO de TOV ei>6s...Tov deairoTov 6 SovXos 

producer of new commodities, at least in wcnrep ^bpiov /cat opyavov d^aipeTOf, TO 5 

the sense in which this is true of the opyavov wairep SovXos d\^vxos. 
weaver s shuttle." SUSEM. (37) 6 14 8vva(] essential quality, at- 

5 9 KTTJjj.a...fx6piov] Eaton com- tribute: a sense the word acquires because 

pares Nic. Eth. v. 6. 8, TO 5e KTrj/j.a Kal the real nature of a thing is denoted 

TO TCKVOV, e ws dV y irrfKiKov Kal -^wpitsQ^, by that which it irttyvKe iroielv Kal Trdo-xetz^ : 

iSffwep fA^pos avTov; a chattel and a child, Bonitz Ind. Ar. s. v. Cp. Nic. Eth. 

until he reaches a certain age and becomes v. i. 6 cv TOJ irpos frepov ^OWL T^V 

independent, are as it were parts of one- dvva/Mv, Pol. IV (vn). i. 12 rrjv avrrjv 

self. ^X i fivva^Lv Kal /mop(pr]i> , also IV (vn). 

10 dirXws x\\ou] "belongs absolutely 4. 10 ; Plato Farm. 134 D r^v fivva/juv 

to another". To express relation to and ^x iv V v ^X et ? Rep. IX. 588 B TO -re 

dependence upon something else we find dSt/ceu Kal TO 5i /ccua irpaiTTeiv r]v eK&Tepov 

(i) the genitive with elvat, as here and $x et - dvvafuv, 

PL Rep. iv. 433 B ToiavTa ola elval TOV, 15 6 -yxp p.^ avrov KrX] Conversely 

or (2) &>e/ca with the genitive, as in in Metaph. I. i. 19 982 b 25 we have a 

Mctapli. I. 2. 19 quoted in n. on 14, or definition of the free man avdpwrros, 

(3) Trpos with the accusative, as in the (pa^v, eXevdepos 6 avTov >e/ca Kal fj.rj 

technical term for the category Trpo s Ti, ^AAou (L. Schiller). SUSEM. (38) 
and Rhet. i. 9. 27 Xev6tpov TO w Trpds 

I 5. 3] 1254 a 3 1254 a 28. 


eortVj, KTrj/na Se opyavov TrpaKTiKov Kal ^wpicrTOv) TTOTepov (II) 

e<JT6 Tt? (pvcrei TOLOVTOS rj ov, Kal iroTepov (3e\Tiov Kal SiKaiov 
Sov\vew r) ov, d\\d Tracra SouXeta. irapd fyvcriv CCTTL, 

20 TavTa crKeTTTeov. ov %a\eTrov Se Kal TW \byw Oewprjaau Kal 

2 GK TWV ytvo^evwv KaTa^aOelv. TO ydp dp^eiv Kal dp^eaOai 
ov fjiovov TWV dvayKaiwv d\\d Kal TWV av^^epovTwv ICTTI. 
Kal v0vs K yVT?js evia 8iecrTrjK Ta fjbev eTrl TO dp^eaOai 
Ta 8 eVt TO dp^eiv. (Kal etSTj TroAA-a Kal dp^ovTwv Kal 

25 dp^ofjbevwv eGTiv (Kal del (Be\Tiwv r) dp%rj r) TWV {3e\Tiova)v 

3 dp^ofjuevwv, olov dvOpwTrov rj dijpiov TO ydp 
diro TWV (3e\Ti6vwv (3e\Tiov epyov OTTOV Se TO 
TO S dp^eTai, GOTTI, TI TOVTWV epyov} ocra ydp eK r jr\ei6vwv 

TTOS uv p 1 P (5 Q b R b S b T b U b V b \V b L s Ar. Aid. Bk. and, with yp. before these words, 
corr. 1 in the margin of P 2>3> , a correction in red ink on the margin of Q, and M b (corr. 
in margin); [dvOpwiros o$z>] Koraes. Dittographia, whichever of the two SouXoj eo~rlv 

or avOpuTTos div gave rise to all the other readings || 23 /cat evOus 24 dp- 

Xeiv Susem. 1 transposed to immediately precede 28 ocra, but see Dittenberger op. c. 
p. 1375 f. who has now been followed in punctuation. Cp. Comm. || 24 [/cat etSr) 
...28 epyov] Schmidt who thinks the proper context is before (pavepov 1259 ^ : ^ 
and if so conjectures eirei de eldrj \\ 25 [17] dp^r] Koraes || 26 dvOpuiruv rj drjpiuv 
Schmidt || 27 VTTO Bk. 2 instead of euro 

17 x w P lo " T v ] Hereby opposed to 
fjiopiov which when separated can do no 
work, as we saw, 2 13 (Shilleto). 

Thus the definition of 6 c/aVet SouXos 
is opyavov e /mtl/i/xov irpo.KTt.Kov /catx^ptcrror, 
5Xws d XXoi; 6V, and this exactly corres 
ponds to the limited meaning of /cr^a 
chattel , thrall , as for instance in 
N. E. v. 6. 8 quoted above. 

c. 5. To whom then does this defini 
tion apply 1 Are there any (pv<rei 8ov\oi, 
for whom a slave s estate is greater good 
and just ? 

1 2*" TW Xxvyw...^ TWV yivo|ievwv] 
Aristotle emphasized the distinction be 
tween the abstract and concrete treatment 
of a subject. The former is. 

as opposed 


n. 354, Zeller Jl. irn 171 n. 2. Eaton 
rightly compares IV (vil). i. 6. 

2 22 TWV <rv|i<j>p6vTt>v] Under the 
limitation laid down in. 6. 6, seen. (7). 

24 i!8T] iroXXd] Cp. Nic. Eth. vin. 
10 4, 5 : Plato Laws in. 690 A. The 
variety implies a gradation. 

25 Kal del P\TCVKT\] This passage 
is referred to IV (vil). 3. 2, see the note: 
cp. IV (Vil). 14. 19 TOV yap 

17 TWV e\ev8epwv dpx n Ka\\Luv KO.I 
fj.a\\ov /xer apeTrjs. SUSKM. (38 b) 

Cp. also VIII (v). ii. 34. 

3 26 TO yap diroT. KT\] Cp. Nic. 
Eth. II. 6. 4 Tracra apery, ov av fj apeTrj, 
auro Te ev e~x. ov aTroTeXe? /cat TO epyov ev 
diroSiowaiv (Eaton). 

28 TOTJTCOV ^p-yov] The function pro 
per to them, the work which they ex 
clusively perform in their relation of 
government and governed, lies in the 
mere exercise of command and tender 
of obedience. See Plato Rep. I. 353 A: 
TOVTO e/ccurrou epyov, o av 77 fj.6vov TL r) /cctX- 
Xtcrra Ti2v aXXwz/ direpyd^Tai. 

ocra -ydp] This argument only applies 
to the general proposition /cat eidr) TroXXct 
/cat dpxovTCov /cat a.p\ofj.ei>wv ecrrt, not to 
the particular explanation attached to it 
Kaidel (3e\Tiwv...e pyov. SUSEM. (39) 

The sentence is parenthetical as in 
I. i. 3, where see note, "For wherever 
several parts, whether continuous or dis 
crete, combine to form a single composite 
whole, in all such cases may be discerned 
a principal or ruling part and one subor 
dinate which is ruled. This follows from 
the whole order of nature (e /c causal, as 
e.g. e/c Trpoat/^crewj, 2 2) and is seen to 
hold good of living things." 


nOAITIKflN A. 5. 

[I. 5. 3 





Kal ylveTai ev TL KOLVOV, eiTe K avve^wv etre eV (II) 
ev aTraaiv efJu^aiveTai TO dp%ov Kal TO dp%6- 

\ >5 e / if > f 

Kal TOUT eK T^?9 a7ra(T7] (pvcrews evvTrapj/ei/ Tot? 
LS Kal *ydp ev rot? fjur) fieTe^ovcrL t^corjs 
olov dp/movlas. d\\d TavTa fjiev laws ej; 
*m\ pas e<JTl crKetyeW TO $e ,wov TrpcoTOv avveo TTjKev 
35 Kal o~u)fjLaTOS, wv TO fjiev dp%ov eVrl (frvcrei, TO 
5 fjuevov oel Se aKOTrelv ev rot? KaTa fyvcriv e^ovai /j,a\\ov 
TO <pvo~eLj Kal /A?) ev rot? 8t,e<p0ap/jLevoi<>. Sto KOL TOI> /3e\- 
TicrTa oiaKel/jievov Kal KaTa cra/Aa Kal KaTa ^v^v dv- 

OpCOTTOV 0C0p7]TeOV } V U> TOVTO $7J\OV TQ)V ^/dp /jLO^OlJpCOV 7) 

31 [/cat TOUT . ..32 ^ai/ uxois] Schmidt || 33 <ev> ap/u-ovla ? Susem. || 35 dpxo- 
fjLevov (to mark a break in the construction) Bonitz || 39 /uox^pwj 77 /iox^^pws] pes- 
tikntium ct prave William; apparently T had 0ctu Aws which Biicheler approves, 

4 31 IK TTJS dircta-T^s <j>v(Tws] The 

conclusion is based upon the whole order 
of nature : it is a universal natural law, 
not a special law applying to living orga 
nisms (Bernays). SUSEM. (38 c) It 
is not probable that CK with genitive = a 
partitive genitive (Bonitz hid. Ar. 235 b 
n), for the only support for such a use is 
the spurious treatise Ilept <PVTUV, 836 a 

s, and 828 b 27. It would be an 
improvement, but hardly correct, to 
render taking the whole of nature this 
is preeminently true of living things . 

32 TOIS [J^ p.Te x.ov<ri KT\] cu ei TO 
X^pov TOV j3e\Tioi>6s effTLV eveKev, Kal TOVTO 
(pavepuv OyCiotws v T T ots KaTa ri^vf]v 
Kal Tots KaTa <pvaiv IV (vil). 14. 10. 

33 ^PX 1 ! ^ ov dpH^ovCas] " Even in 
things without life there is a species of 
dominance, in music for instance": each 
musical mode being ruled by its key 
note, TI fj-ffftj (originally the note 
struck by the middle string of the hepta 
chord *). Compare Probl. xix. 33 920 a 
21 T? yap ^af] Kal r/^efiwi/: 36 
920 b 9 TO yp/j.oa Oai iariv awdcraLs sc. Ta?s 

j, TO 5e ^x iv T^ 5 "Pos Tr\v ^ffj]V. 
44 922 a 23 eTreidrj TUV /JLTa^i> r(av 

TO H^ffOV [MVOV dpX~n T ^ iffTlV 

...27 (pOoyyoL &v i] /ntcrr) Ka\ovuvrj /movrj 
apx?l e&Ti OaT^pov TeTpaxopSov. On the 
technical sense of apfj.ov[a = eWos dia- 
n-aauv see Exc. ill. on Bk. V (vin). 
Another political simile from the modes 
Eth. End. VII. 9. 4: &TTI TO auTo e-rrl TUV 
apiJ.ovi.Cjv Kal ruv ev Tals TroXiTeicus, inas- 

* The term dominant for the fifth above the 
y-note in a modern scale is quite different. 

much as some are opBal, others 
aeis. Giphanius and others wrongly take 
ap/j.ov[as as qualifying dpx^~ dominance 
in the sense, that is, of a blending or sub 
ordination of parts. Cp. De Anima i. 
4. i TJ]V apuovlav Kpdffiv Kal avvOecnv tvav- 
Tiuv elvac. This would be the sense of 
&vij,(pwvia, rather than of ap/jiovia, in music: 
Probl. Xix. 38 921 a 2. 
f i|o)TepiKWTpas t<rr\ o^Kexj/ews] " would 
perhaps involve a discussion somewhat 
outside the subject ". Obviously the 
simple meaning here as in e. Trpd^ecs iv 
(vn). 3. 8: not to be pressed (as by 
Thurot Etudes 219 f., Ueberweg Hist, of 
Phil. Eng. tr. I. 143) to signify those 
parts of Aristotle s strictly scientific works 
which are "dialectical" i.e. controver 
sial, rather than " apodeictical " i. c. 
purely scientific. 

34 TO 8 u>ov KT\] The enumeration 
is interrupted at apxb^evov by the qualify 
ing phrase in parenthesis del d aKOTreif... 
%X eLV m sucn a wa 7 tnat even the first 
member ($$ov} is only quoted by its first 
division into soul and body, while the 
second subdivision into rational and 
irrational parts of the soul is not added 
until the enumeration is resumed, 6. 
We should expect SevTepov, rplrov to 
correspond with Trpurov, in place of them 
we find TrdXti and TI e in 7. SUSEM. 
(39 b) 

5 This does not help us to determine 
what is KaTa (pv<riv. But Aristotle s 
meaning is the same as in 2 8 oto> yap 
tan TTJs yevtaeus T\<r6eta"r]s 
TT)p(f)V(Tiv elvai e/cdo"Tou. Cp. 
Eth. ix. 9. 8, Cic. Tusc. i 32 (Eaton). 

I. 5. 6] 1254 a 29 1254 b 9. 159 

So^eiev av ap^eiv 7roXX/a9 TO crw/jia 
<^auXo)9 Kal Trapd (pixriv e^etv. kern 
8 ovv, wcTTrep \ejo/ji6v, Trptorov ev co&> Oewprfaai Kal Se- 
(TTroTiKrjv dp^xfiv Kai TroXiriKrjv rj fjiev yap "^V)(rj rov aw- 
/i<ZT09 ap^et SecTTroTiKrjv dp^v, b Se ^01)9 T?;9 ope| : 6ft)9 TTO- 
\LTtKrjv Kal fBaaiKiK^V ev ot9 fyavepov eanv OTL Kara (j)v- 
aiv Kal (TVfJb^epov TO dp^ecrOai TCO acof^arL VTTO Trjs tyv- 
Kal TO) TraOriTLKM l^opla) VTTO rov vov Kal TOV /Jiopiov TOV 
e^o^T09, TO 8 ef icrov r) avdircCKiv fiXaffepbv 


erasing 0a^Xws /cat just afterwards; /moxdypus, clue to a mistaken correction written, 
over /xox#??pwj>, may have displaced 0auXcoj, as Schmidt once suggested: now he 
suspects (j.oxOr)puv 77 : [77 ^ox^r/poJs ex6^rwi ] Studemund 

1254 ^ 2 KCt ^^ 05<rtj wanting in M H and P 1 (ist hand), but added in the 
margin by p 1 j| p 2 - 3 - have irepl for Trapd \\ 6 [/cai (3a<rt.\iKr]i>] Oncken, perhaps 

6 1254 b 3 f. This analogy is carried 
out in Nic. Etk. v. n 9, i. 13 1 8, HI. 
3 18, 12 6. Cp. also Plato Phaedo 80 
A ttreidav ev r<p aury ucrc ^vxv Kal aw/J.a, 
T(f JJLV 5ov\eveiv Kal apxeffdat r) 
TT/jocTTaTret, rrj 8e dp%eti Ka 
feii ; Pliacdrus 237 f., not to mention 
Rep, IX. 589 E, 590 c, D (Eaton). Several 
characteristic phrases here come from 
Plato. For similar analogies turning on 
various forms of dpx n see Nic. Etk. v. 6. 
8 f., ii 9 with Jackson s notes ; vm. 
10 4, 5, ii \~ 6 - f 

8 TW ira9T]TiKw... \6-yov ^x VTOS ] Cp. 
iv (vn). 15. 9 with n. (935). More 
precisely Aristotle distinguishes in the 
human soul (i) the rational part or think 
ing soul, yoOs, (2) the sentient appetitive 
soul, cp. iv (vn). 7. 5 n. (786), and (3) 
the nutritive or vegetative soul. The 
lower animals have the two latter merely, 
plants have only the third : see Zeller op. 
c. n ii 497 f., 509 f., 566 ff. The nutri 
tive soul is of no importance for the pre 
sent inquiry, compare Nic. JEth. i. 13 
n 14; here it is left entirely out of 
the question as in c. 13 6, iv(vii). 14 
9 f., 15 9, 10, where see the notes, 
cp. also in. 4 6 ;/. (472). He further 
divides the rational soul into two parts : 
i cognitive reason (eTTicrTtj/uiOfiKov), ii re 
flective or opining reason (XoyiffriKov, 
do^aaTLKov). The latter includes that part 
of the speculative reason which attains to 
a mere idea or opinion (u7r6X7?i/ is = un 
verified belief, assumption, 5o ct) but 

falls short of true knowledge, and more 
especially the practical reason with its 
peculiar faculty of taking counsel or de 
liberating with itself (/3ou\eim/coV, see 13 
7 n.), or in other voids the faculty of 
reflexion from which Aristotle has borrow 
ed the name (XoyicrTiKoi*) for all this part 
of the reason. It was explained in ;/. (34) 
on I. 4. i that the practical reason is 
again divided into (i) didvoia Trpa/crtK?/, 
practical reason in the strict sense, and 
(2) constructive, i.e. technical, reason, 5. 
Kri, which when developed becomes 
artistic skill*: see A r ic. Eth. vi. i 
5f; ^ 3, 55 4:3, 5 8, 12 2; 
Metaph. vi. i. 5 1025 b 25 f. Compare 
Walter and Zeller as above quoted, and 
in modification of their views Susemihl 
Studies in the Nic. Eth. in the Jahrb. 
f. Philol. cxix. 1879. 737 ff. 

If we combine with the above the re 
sults stated in the note on I. 13. 6 we 
obtain the following scheme of the rational 
soul according to Aristotle : 

* In the Politics however Te\vT] generally de 
notes (i) Art as opposed to Nature, (2) the total 
activity in"any~3epartfflenT"WtfaTsdever of techni 
cal skill or the construction ofjiew products ; 
the exercise ofcfafts and industries orall kinds, 
including occasionally even practical^ aptitudes 
such as Household Management (ot/coi Oyu.i.Krf). 
This is the sense in 4 i above, where the 
former or arts proper are accordingly distin 
guished from practical aptitudes by the addition 
of a3pi<rfxeVais, cp. n. (34). It is only in ii 6 
that TexviKajTorai epyacri ou = occupation where 
artistic skill is most required : see n. (102). 



[I. 5. 7 

7 TrdXiv ev dvOpwTro) /cal TO?? a/v/vot? ^coot? oocravTO) 1 ? TO, 12 
ii /n,ev ydp r]fjuepa TWV dyplwv /SeXT/&> TTJV (frvaiv, TOVTOLS Be 
/3e\Tiov dp^ecrOai, VTT dvOpwrrov Tvy^dvei ydp cro)- 
OVTWS. eTi Be TO dppev Trpos TO 6r)\v <pvcrei TO 

TO Be %elpov /cal TO /jiev dp^ov TO Be dp^pfjievov. 
15 TOZ^ avTov Be Tpoirov dvayKoiov eivcu KOI ejrl Trdvpwv 
8 TTGDV. ooroi fj,v ovv TOCTOVTOV BiecrTdaiv oo~ov tyv xr} crcb/jiaTOS is 
Kal dvOpwTTOs Orjpiov (Bid/ceiVTai, Be TOVTOV TOV TpoTrov, bcrwv 

13 ecrri Ar. (?) cst igitnr, Suscm. 3 (a misprint) || 14 II- Bk. omit /cai || 16 8ce- 
crracri TOGOVTOV M s , Stecrracrt TOLOVTOV I 1 |j / I XTJS crcDjCca /cat avOpdoirov 6-r)piov ? Thurot, 
more correctly ; but perhaps an improvement upon Aristotle himself || 1 7 oe 
wanting in M s l n 3 Q b T b Ar. Aid. and P 2 (ist hand, supplied by corr. 2 ) 

(in the wider sense) 


(in the strict sense) 

Now in the Politics we have to deal 

calj cason (in _thc strict sense of tlie_termj|_ 
nvor~lho_spr.ori7r)nrr nt i lTe_souT7 the cu tr- 

_ ^ 

Zrepov TO opeK.TLKbv i<al (ftevKTiKOv, 
OVT a\\r)\wv oure TOV alffOriTiKov dXXo, 
TO dvoiL dXXo) in regard to its appetitive 
or emotional, and not to its sentient or 
percipient side. Obedience to this su 
premacy constitutes moral or ethical 
virtue, virtue of character, rjOos. Cp. I. 
13. 6 ., NIC. Eth. i. 7 12 f., 13 10 f.; 

VI. 12 6. SUSEM. (40) 

7 10 ira\iv...i3 ^TI 8e] See on 4 a 
34 above, cotravrcos] Here again, in man s 
relation to the animals we see the same 
thing : clearly, from what follows, the 
difference between ruler and ruled and 
the advantage derived by the one from 
the rule of the other. SUSEM. (41, 42) 

Cp. i i did TT/V ffWTrjpiav (Congreve). 

1 1 TO, TCOV d-ypicov] Plato Po- 
liticus 264 A, difiprjTO TO ^ov rw rt^acrw 
/cat dypiy. TCI ptv yap ^x VTa TLdaa-evea- 
6ai <f>v<riv r/^epa TrpoffeipyTai, ra oe /j-r/ 
^X vra tiypia- A division which Aristotle 
censures as unscientific De part, animal, i. 
3. 13 643 b 3, iravTO. yap u>s direiv, off a 
rj/mepa, /cat ciypia Tvyx,dvei OVTO.. 

13 r6 appev KT\] Cp. 12 i nn. (108, 
109), 13 pff. (117, 120). SUSEM. (42 b) 

14 KpiTTOv...xipov] Elsewhere 
Orj\v is declared to be wcnrep dppev 
pcj/mevov, or dvaTnjpia. This is Plato s 
doctrine of the natural inferiority of the 
sex : Rep. V. 455 E e?rt irdcriv dcrOevecrTepov 
yvvrj avopbs,LaiiJSVl. 781 B oacpde r] OtjXaa 
ripTiv 0i crts eaTi Trpos dpeTrjv -^eipuv Trjs 
T<JJV dppevwv, Tiinaeiis 42 A, r> : TO KpeiT- 
TOV TOLOVTOV eitj yevos . . ,dv)jp, 90 E f. 

15 e-rrl irdvTwv dvO. sc. in relation to 
one another. 

8 16 oo-oi. .,17 0i]piov] Cp. in. ii. 
5 KO.LTQL T L dicKpepoixnv eVtot T&V Oripiwv, cus 
eiros direlv ; How is the existence of such 
men possible, on Aristotle s own psycho 
logy? There is a difference of kind 
between man and the brutes, the latter not 
having a rational part of the soul (see n. 
on 6 above) ; but between the most 
perfect and the least perfect of men there 
is at most but a difference of degree, even 
when in the latter this rational part is 
reduced to the minimum immediately 
described, n. (45). We must understand 
Aristotle to follow the general current of 
Greek ideas- and the usage of language 
when "he regards bestial limitationtp 
sensual --enpyiri put y callousness to~TnsuiT, 
indifferencex) knowleileT^oarsETre^s ami 

vulgarism act or speech iff general as a 
servile, .. degraded disposition dvdpairo- 
5w5ta ^(Schiller, who quotes Orelli Arts- 

I. 5. 9] 

1254 b 10 1254b 23. 161 

teal TOVT eanv air avrwv (II) 

epyov ?; rou O-W/JLCITOS 

TOL /JL6V i(7L 

ravrrjv rrjv dp^rjv, elirep real Tot? 
6 &vvdfj,6vos d\\ov elvai 
\<TTIV) /cal 6 KOIVWVWV \6jov ToaovTOv ocrov 



ecrri yap 
/cat d\X,ov 

18 tffrtv M s , An- P 2 - 3<4 -QM b T b Aid. Bk., e<rrat S b || 20 tfvrrep Biicheler for 
efaep, but see Dittenberger <?/. <r. p. i366f. || &m> a/>a ? Susem. ; since no 5k cor 
responds to the preceding ^v ovv and p.v Thurot suspects some deeper corruption, 
a lacuna, it may be, before OTI yap \\ 216 5uj>a ( aefoj...22 /cat suspected by Schmidt 
|| 23 Ao7ou H 2 Ar. Bk. Schneider Spengel, perhaps rightly || [al(r6av6/j,eva] Bender 
[a\\d] Spengel al^ddvovrai ? Schneider 

totelcs Pddagogik 69). The passages to 
consult are ill. 4 u, iv(vn). 17 7, 
9; alsov(vm). 6 8, iv(vn). 15 5 
with the notes: Nic. Eth. I. 5 3: ill. 
10 8, 1 1 3 : iv. 5 6 : and the further 
references under avdpcnrodudris Bonitz/;/^. 
Ar. 54 b 30 f. SUSEM. (43) 

19 OLS (3e \Tiov KT\] Plato Rep. ix. 
590 D o;j afj.eii>ov ov TTO.VTI virb deiov /cat 
(f>povifj.ov apxecrdai ^ctXtcrra fj.ev olKelov 
^XO^TOS ev avr^, el 8 fj.rj, ^udev e0e(rrcu- 
ros : a passage which contains something 
more than the germ of Aristotle s whole 
doctrine of natural slavery. 

20 TOIS lp7][X6VOLS] TW CrcO^ClTt, TO) f 

TradrjTiKijj /Aopiip, rw Ofjpiw, ry 9?7\et (Con- j 

9 21 816 Kal a XXou <TTUV] As a 
general rule slavery is due to a natural 
inferiority. But this must not be pressed 
too far: from c. 6 an unjust slavery is 
possible, cum hi sunt alterius qui sui 
possunt esse, Cic. De Rep. in. 37 
(Congreve). SUSEM. (44) 

22 o(rov al<r0dv(r0cu 
In c. 13 14^16 r.npnrity fo ndmit reason 
or understand its commands (alcrOdvea-- 
0at) is ascrTbed to these natural slaves in 
a higher_H^ree than to cMMrejir-fe&e 
nofe^lor children, while their reason is 
still undeveloped, attend too much to 
the mere suggestions of the instincts and 
passions of sense; Nic. Eth. I. 3. 67"ifi. 
12.6. Moreover Aristotle is here assert 
ing more than his own psychology justi 
fies: for what he here leaves to the 
slave s practical reason is more correctly 
attributed to the irrational soul, that is, 
to speak accurately (see n. on 6), the 
appetitive soul, in iv (vn). 14 9, cp. 
Nic. Eth. i. [3. 15 f. : namely, the ca 
pacity of allowing itself to be guided by 


practical reason. As the power to reflect 
is to Aristotle amongst the most essential 
peculiarities of the practical reason see 
n. (40) on 6 this cannot with any con 
sistency be wholly denied to the slave as 
it is here and c. 13 7 (where see note) 
if it be once granted that the slave s soul 
has a rational part under which is in 
cluded the possession of practical reason. 
At the most there can be merely an ap 
proximation to the state here described. 
See further on c. 13 12. A6yos, 

which here = reason, is the jSouXeim/cdi 
f 3 7 ( see n -} - rnore precisely, opOos 
\6yos in the Ethics, right or sound un 
derstanding as the law and criterion of 
human action in the sphere of practice 
and -morals. Preeminent skill in the ex 
ercise of this \6yos is 0p6z/r?crts = insight, 
prudence : see Zeller op. c. n ii 652 f., 
Walter op. c. 353 503. Aristotle is 
consistent when he allows (ppoviyns to 
none but the 0u<ret dea-irorTjs : I. 13. 8 n. 
(115), 111.4. 17 n. (497). But if the (f>v(rei 
8ov\os were wholly devoid of practical 
reason of his own he would, by Aristotle s 
own definition, cease to be a human 
being and to possess even the scanty 
remains of capacity for human and moral 
virtue which is left him according to c. 
13 114 : cp. *&& c. _ig_ i with 
my note (19 b). He would then~be re 
duced to the level of the brute, in himself 
unable to resist the promptings of sensual 
desires. Seew. p. 211. SUSEM. (45) 

23 Xxxyw al<r0.] On atcr07;<m, alffdd- 
vefftiai. see n. (570) upon ill. n. 9. 
SUSEM. (45 b) If \6yov is the right 
reading, then the copula is omitted as if 
ailaOavbfJieva. were an adjective : "the other 
animals (are) not attentive to reason, but 
obey their passions. 


162 nOAITIKHN A. 5. [I. 5. 9 

vTrrjpeTel. Kal rj ^peia Se rrapaXXdrTei 

25 r) ydp Trpbs rdvayKala TW crcofjiaTi {Sorjdeia ylveTai Trap 
dfjifyolv, Trapd Te TWV Sov\a)v Kal Trapd rwv rj/JLepwv foo 

10 fBov\erai jJiev ovv r) fyvcris Kal Ta atctfJiaTa Siafyepov, 
Troielv Ta TWV e\ev6pwv Kal TWV Sov\coi ) rd pev 
Trpo? Trjv dvayKaiav ^prjcnv, TCI 8 opdd Kal d^prjcrra 

30 Tft? TOiavTas epyacrias, a\\ci ypYjcriiJia Trpo? Tro\i~riKov 
{Blov (OUTO? Se Kal yiverai Siyprj/mevos el ? Te TTJV TTo\efJiiKriv 
%peiav Kal rr}v elprjviKrjv), crv/ji/3alvei Se TroXXaKts Kal rov- 
vavTiov, TOI)? jJLev Ta o-aiuaTa e^eiv eXevOepcov TOZ)? 8e T? (p. 8) 
^rv^d^ errel TOVTO ye fyavepov, co? el TOCTOVTOV yevoivro Sid- 15 

35 (f>opoL TO awfJia uovov ocrov al TWV Oewv etVoz^e?, rovs vrro- 

\eiTT o/Jievovs TTCLVT^ (fialev dv ctf/ou? elvau TOVTOIS $ov\evei-v. 

i 11 el S errl TOV crcu/naTOS TOVT* d\7]0es, TTO\V SiKaiorepov errl 

rrjs "^^X^ TOVTO Siajplcrdat XX ov^ 6/u/otw? pdBtov ISeii 

TO Te TTIS drwyris /caXXo? Kal TO TOV 

28 Troter P 3 - 6 QM b S b T b Ar. Aid. and ist hand of P 2 (emended by corr.-) || ^er 
<ra7reti a /cat>, or something similar, Schmidt with great probability; opda] 
vwdpa Reiske || 31 /cat wanting in L s . [o5ros...32 elp7)i>iKr]v] Schneider and Schmidt, 
perhaps not unreasonably || 33 e\ev0tpuv] erepuv or a little before <rwv ov\wv> 
rous /AW Ileitland wrongly : Aristotle s meaning would have been clearer if he had 
added /JLOVOV after crw^ara or after ^u^ds i| 36 Oncken thinks the conclusion omitted 
after dovXevew ; but it cajne first: /3ou\ercu fj.ev ovv ...... roi)s 8e rds / I xas 

24 f. Kal r\ XP 6 ^ a ^^ irapaXXaTTti KT\] and coloured races ! Zeller op. c. II ii 

"Moreover the service afforded by the 691 ;/. (2). See on I. 2 4 n. (13). 

slave is not very far removed from that of Lang however from another point of 

domesticated animals; viz. bo^Ulyait}-4Vf7?j! i view justly remarks op. c. Essays 60: 

the dative) towards-- the necessaries of " we must remember no one would have 

life." Comp. Plato Polit. 289 B: slaves been more bitter than Aristotle against 

and domesticated animals as species of the negro-slavery on plantations of mo- 

the same genus Trepl fyuv KTTJCTLV TWV dern days. To turn the servants of the 

-r)[jitpwv Tr\rji> 8ov\ui> : also c. 2 5 above . noble life into tools of limitless money- 

(15): and 6 10 n. (57). SUSEM. (46) making would have been, in his view, 

10 27 POV\TCU] Nature designs, but unnatural. We must remember also, that 

is sometimes thwarted. See 6 8 ;/. (56). he would have held up the promise and 

32 xptfav] "including services in reward of freedom, to stimulate his serfs 

war as well as in peace." to virtuous lives, and, with freedom in 

34 eirel TOVTO -ye KT\] Cp. iv (vn). prospect, and friendship in the meantime, 

14. 2. Congreve and Eaton compare with every lovely rite of divine service 

Herod. V. 47. This remark has a truly performed for their sake, there may have 

Hellenic ring. To the Greek, mental been worse lives than those of the Greek 

worth is necessarily and naturally pre- slaves." SUSEM. (47) 

sented in a harmonious external form ; 11 38 ov\ 6p.os paSiov ISeiv KT\] 

and in the very beauty of the race, of Eaton compares Nic. Eth. I. 13. 16 d\\ 

which he was thoroughly conscious, Ari- iv rots ffufj.a<ri [nkv dpw/xev TO 

stotle finds direct proof of its superiority pevov, eiri de TIJS 

to the barbarians. What a complete jus- Should we not rather think of Plat. 
tirication this for the slavery of the black Phacdr. 250 n E, Xen. Mem. ill. 10. 3? 

I. 6. 2] 

1254 b 24 1255 a 8. 


55* OTL fj,ev Tolvvv eldl (frvaei nves 01 fJbev e\evOepot o"i Be Sou- (II) 

Xo, (fravepov, ot? KOI crv^^epei TO $ov\eveiv Kal SiKaiov 
6 ea-riv on 8e Kal ol rdvavrla fyda-Kovres rpojrov nvd \eyov- is 

aiv opOws, ov ^aXerrov ISeiv. S^w? jdp XeyeTat TO 8ov\V6Lv 

5 teal 6 8o{)Xo?. eo~Tt ydp T/,<? Kal Kara VOJJLOV SouXo? Kal 

8ov\evo)v 6 jdp vofjuos b[Jio\o>yia T/9 eanv, ev w rd Kara 

2 7ro\,e^ov Kparovfieva TWV Kparovvrwv elvai ^aaiv. rovro Sr) 

TO SiKaiov TroXXot- TWV - ev Tot? vofjiois wcrTrep prjropa ypd- 

1255 a 1 oTi...b 3 Svvarai is cited by Pseudo-Plutarch de nobil. c. 6, p. 932 B sq. 

5 /cat before /card omitted in II 1 M b Ar. Aid. Plut. and in P 3 (ist hand added by a 
later hand) || 6 ev 17 Bas. 3 , e0 $ omitting the following (paalv Bernays; Hampke 
punctuates 5ov\eijuv (6...rts eortV), ev y /cr\, cp. Hermes XIX. 577 . 

the doctrine of natural slavery (against 
Ridgeway 129 f) "do, to a certain ex 
tent, argue correctly. For the terms 
slavery and slave are used in two senses. 
< Besides the natural > there is also the 
conventional slave and conventional 
slavery; this convention being a species 
of agreement whereby the conquered in 
war are declared the property of their 

6 6 Yap v6[j.os...7 4>acrv] Xenophon 
Cyr. VII. 5. 73 vo/uos yap ei> iracnv avdpw- 
Trots a t Sto? ecrrtf, orav TroXe/x.oiVrwi TroXts 
dXy, TUV eXdvrwv elvai. /cat ra crri/mara rCov 
ev r-fi TroXet /cat TO, xpT^ftara (Congreve). 
It is well known that customs and usages 
purely conventional and resting on mere 
tradition were called VO/JLOL by the Greeks 
and considered more sacred and venerable 
than the written laws: ill. 16 9 ert 
Kvpiwrepoi. /cat irepi Kvpt-wrepuv rwv Kara 
ypdfj./n-ara vo/uwv ol Kara ra Wt] elfflv, and 
vii (vi). 5 2. Yet these "unwritten 
laws " are regarded as if each of them 
could be derived from a definite law 
giver : see on n. 9 12, 14. SUSEM. 
(48) Cp. Grote Plato I. 249 f., 252 n. 

2 7 " This conventional right is by 
many jurisconsults arraigned, like a de 
magogue, of unconstitutionalism." Yet 
slavery among the ancients was at first 
an unmingled blessing an important 
conquest of the spirit of humanity. \Yhen 
len _were altogether 1 >arhaotts they_ 
iHpi~trrejl^3H5gHgF^^ : Lecky Hist, of 
Rationalism II. 254. 

8 -ypd^ovTCU irapavofiw^j This in 
dictment was laid against any private 
citizen who had proposed or carried an 
unconstitutional law or popular decree, 
i. e. one which contravened laws or decrees 
in force at the time and not previously 

II 2 

c. 6 77^r^ w then one species of 
slavery, which is natural. But there is 
another species, conventional slavery : i. 
The justice of the convention which allows 
prisoners taken in war to be sold for slaves 
is unconditionally challenged by some (A] 
and defended by others \E] : i. The 
reason why there are these conflicting 
views, and why nevertheless they have a 
common ground, is the implication of 
virtue and superior fora. The issue 
turns on what constitutes right and jus 
tice : 3. Weakness of the one vieiv (A], 
which implies a denial of the right of su 
perior virtiie to rule: 4. Others (C), 
again, argue that all slavery, so far as it 
is legal, is just : but the war might be tin- 
just, and they would refuse to apply their 
principle consistently to captive Greeks : 
5. This refusal leads them back to TO 
0u(Tct 5ou\oj> : 6. Illustration from the 
conception of nobility: 7. Men are 
marked off for true freedom and true no 
bility by virtue (aperrj) : 8. Recapitula 
tion: 9, 10. 

See Excursus n. ; Hampke in Philo- 
logus xxiv. 1866. 172 175, who com 
pares iv(vii). 2 12 18; in The 
Transactions of Camb. PJiilol. Soc. II. 
1883 Jackson pp. in 116, Postgate pp. 
119 123, Ridgeway pp. 128 130; and 
Susemihl in ffermesxix. 1884. =,76 ^88. 
TteM&ftiJta iuniud^s of AT. /^LCC. 

theoretical conclusions by a comparison 
with various received opinions. 

1 1255 a i ff. " It is thus plain that 
in certain cases there are natural freemen 
and natural slaves, for the latter of whom 
the estate of slavery is both advantageous 
and just. And yet it is easy to see that 
those who maintain the opposite " viz. of 


nOAITIKflN A. 6. 

[I. 6. 2 

<f)oi>Tai Trapavo/jicov, co? Seivbv el TOV fiidaaaOai Swa/juevov (II) 
10 /cal KaTcl CivvajJiiv KpeiTTOvos eVrat $ov\ov /cal dp%6 pevov 

TO ftiaaOev. /cal roi? fiev ovrcos Sofcel rot? 3e e/celvws, /cal 
3 rwv (70(j)cov. CLITIOV Be TavTrjs TTJS d^io-pijTrjo-ews, /cal o 17 

?ro//6t TOI)? \6<yovs eTraXXaTTeiv, OTL TpoTrov iiva dperrj TVJ- 

[/ccu] Koraes, wrongly 

Bernays differently, see p. 209. SUSEM. 

1 3 Xoyovs, often taken as arguments, 
or again as = propositions, should be ex 
plained more widely as "the propositions 
[conventional slavery is just, is unjust] 
together with the arguments supporting 
them and the conclusions adopted in con 
sequence of them," thus nearly = views 
or reasonings (Postgate<?/>. c. 121, 123^.), 
platforms (Heitland), theories. 

liraXXciTTetv, as in I. 9. 15, vi(iv). 10. 
2, vii(vi). i. 3; see Ileitland s examina 
tion of these passages Notes ii 13, and 
the passages collected by Jackson op. c. 
114 n. Bonitz Index s.v. compares ^?ra/z- 
(poTepi^eiv and explains that from the 
sense of "to alternate" it comes to be 
applied ad ca quae inter duo genera ita 
suut interposita lit cum utroqne cohacrc- 
ant. " Said of two different, or even 
opposite, things or views which yet have 
something in common and again approxi 
mate or meet or even cross or run into 
each other or are in inseparable con 
nexion" (Susem.). Oncken took it of 
arguments crossed or traversed by counter 
arguments. Heitland and Jackson of 
propositions overlapping : but the former 
thinks these are the sub-contraries (a) some 
slavery is just, (l>) some slavery is unjust: 
the latter holds that it is the Xoyot of (A) 
and (B) all slavery is unjust, all slavery 
is just which overlap : because the 
"slaveries which (A) pronounces unjust, 
(B) pronounces just." (See by all means 
the context of this remark, Ex. II. p. 208.) 

Tpoirov nva KxX] "in a sense vir 
tue, provided it finds proper appliances, 
is in fact best able to subdue by force, 
and the conquering side always has ad 
vantage in good of some sort." These 
two clauses are not opposed (against 
Jackson 114 f., Postgate 122), they merely 
put the same thing in a different form. 
There is always a presumption that j3ia 
carries with it dpeT?? : this is the common 
ground where the two contending parties 
meet, and here Aristotle also agrees with 
them. But from this they draw opposite 
inferences as to the nature of TO 5i 
as to when it is just to use force. 

repealed. Proceedings had to be com 
menced within a year from the day when 
the proposal was made or adopted ; other 
wise the proposer escaped a personal 
prosecution. The illegality might con 
sist in the substance of the proposal, in 
its form, or in both at once. A decree 
(i/ ?70t(T / ua) would be formally unconstitu 
tional if brought before the popular as 
sembly without consent of the /3cwX?} 
previously obtained, although there might 
be no decree proposed by the BOV\T} on 
the same subject which it could contra 
vene (Meier and Schomann AttiscJier 
Process 283 f.). The comparison here 
relates to illegality in substance, for the 
sense is that the convention or positive 
law in question violates natural law. 
SUSEM. (49) 

9 cos 8tv6v KrX] "on the ground that 
it is monstrous if mere ability to subdue 
by force, and superiority in might alone, 
shall give ownership and rule over that 
which it subdues." T.he-j^pj 

o C-this vie wL_are_ no_doubJ:_Llie. same as 
those_who_declare aJl_slavery to__be_c.ori : 
t.rjuX-lo^iaJ^i^L: see 4> T0 s ^ v euVota 
SOKCI TO diKaiov elvoiL and 3 i, TCHS 5e 
Trapd <pv(nv TO <5e<r7ro-eti>, where see note. 
SUSEM. (49 b) Note the genitive after 
ap-xpv-tvov, "subject of the coercer". 

ii "This then is their view: others 
again take the former view"- (e/cet^ws): 
namely, that prescribed by the conven 
tion or positive law mentioned in i : doKec 
eKeivus repeats the ipaalv of line 7. For 
convenience we may denote by (A) the 
opponents (rots ^fv], and by (B) the 
defenders of conventional slavery (TCHS 
5e); the view of the latter is shared, 
though on other grounds, by a third 
party (c) the TLVS of line 22. 

3 12 "The reason of the conflict" 
between (A) and (B) "and what" at the 
same time "makes the (two opposed) views 
overlap." The general sense, as explained 
p. 206, is that (i) the views of (A) and (B) 
stand sharply opposed (cp. 19 diaffTdvTuv 
%wpts), and yet (ii) they have a common 
point of contact, the two distinct facts (i) 
and (ii) being due to one and the same 
cause, the implication of virtue and force. 

I. 6. 4] 

1255 a 9 1255 a 20. 


KOI (Bid^ecrOai Svvarcu /*\WTa, KOL (II) 
15 ecrriv del TO /cparovv eV VTrepo^f) djaOov TWOS, ware Sorcelv 
/it?) dvev dpeTrjs elvcu TTJV ftiav, d\\d rrepl rov &IKCILOV fJio- 
4 vov elvai rrjv d^io-fB^TTja-iv (bid yap TOVTO rot? fjiev evvoia 
So/cei TO SiKdiov elvai, rot? S avTo TOVTO Si/caiov, TO TOP 
KpeiTTOva dp xeiv) &rei $iao~TdvTwv 76 y^wpls TOVTWV TCOV \6- IB 
20 <ycov ovT6 lo-^ypov ovSev e-^ovcriv OVTC TnOavbv aTepoi \6yoi, co? 

17 evvo^ia Lambin, wrongly: < / u,er > evvoias ? Schneider 

14 xo/37?7ta = means, resources: 77 e/c- 
ros %. favourable external circumstances, 
external goods Nic. Eth. x. 8 4; so of 
the individual Pol. iv(vn). 13 3. In a 
wider sense, anything with which the state 
requires to be furnished, even population, 
territory iv(vn). 4 2, 4. 

13 1 6 6 Ti...piav] Fiilleborn remarks 
with truth that the qualifications neces 
sary here (amounting in all to cctcris 

ing obedience which an inferior renders 
to a kind and considerate superior . To 
take it solely to mean the goodwill of 
governors to governed seriously invali 
dates the protest of the anti-slavery party 
irapa fyvaiv elvai. TO 3ecr7r6fetz> ; masters 
might always urge the plea that they held 
their slaves from disinterested motives. 
Giphanius notes well : benevolentia et 
bona existimatio magistratus et dominos 

paribus) really make the whole theory peperit. Cp. vii(vi). 5 4, ro; VIII (v). 

C.-L I.-. t t ~ L! 4-1,:.,^ :., *-!,:.-, . _ & . _.. _*>__. _.v_._. > -T . ^_ _ 

futile, because other things in this 
connexion are so seldom equal . Bodily 
qualities, superior numbers and wea 
pons, all sorts of external circumstances 
often largely contribute to victory. Con 
quest is no valid proof of the higher 
excellence of the conqueror : besides, the 
one kind of mental capacity which has 

r i : avayKcuov euVous elf at rcus TV- 
. TOVS 5ov\ovs /cat rots yvvaiKas. 

1 8 TO TOV KpeiTTova dpxiv] Cp. 
Thuc. v. 105. 2, Plato Gorgias 483 c f. 

19 eirei answers the sentence 15 dWe 
SoKelv. . . " If however these two views stand 
opposed and apart, the former has neither 

force nor plausibility, (implying as it does) 

contributed to his victory is no guarantee "\that the superior in virtue has no right to 
that he also possesses the other which rule and be master." %w/3ts is used pre- 
qualifies him for wise government, above picatively, diao-TavTiov is the opposite of 
all for the exercise of despotic rule over a FTraAXdrretj : if the point of contact be- 
conquered foe. Nevertheless Aristotle j[ween the two views be lost, if they 
would be borne out by a belief in the /stand opposed without any community. 

or the sense of separation the passage 
quoted by Jackson (see p. 208) DC 
long, et brcv. vitae, 464 b 26, is most 
instructive: iroTepov TavTa /ua/c/oo/3ta /cat 

moral government of the world*: in the 
success attends upon The most 

a us EM. 

15 wo-ToKliv KT\] "hence it seems 
that force to coerce is never independent 

vyieiva. T&V (pvcrei 

of virtue, but that the dispute turns on T? Kexupio-Tai /cat TO 

the nature of right and justice. 

4 17 f. ("For this reason some take 
the mutual goodwill" of governors and 
governed "to constitute right, others stand 
on the naked right of the stronger to 
rule.") The parenthesis is due to Ridge- 
way ; Heitland saw that this remark 
breaks the course of the argument (p. 
14). The grounds for the view of (B), 
which had not been stated above i, 2, 
are now given by 5id TOVTO. 

TOIS nev] Clearly again the unqualified 
opponents of slavery. SUSEM. (50 b) 

Jackson, 115 ., first proved that one 
meaning of eilvoia is loyalty: the will- 

* [And no less by the scientific doctrine of 
the survival of the fittest.] 

rj KO.T 
XaTTet TO, 

OJ /cat TO 
voaovs eira.\- 
TT\V tyvcnv crw/xaTa TO?S 
s, /car evt as 5 ouSej/ Kw\vti 
voG<JoQi.s elvai yu,a/cpo/3toi;s oi>Tas. Others 
(Schneider, Jackson, Postgate, Ridgeway) 
take 8ia.(FTa.vT(avsi per se ponantur, if 
disentangled, each taken separately. 

20 drepot \6 < yoi = one of the two sets 
of arguments advanced, that of (A). 
Postgate (pp. c. 123) thinks aYepos \o7os 
would be clearer. Schneider took it = 
neutra ratio: to which Hampke rejoined 
that this sense requires ouSerepot. Jackson 
however still maintains that it is a true 
plural as in 13 TOVS \6yovs , but then 
we should have d/j.<f>oTpoi: his novel 
and ingenious interpretation, op. c.\i f., 



[I. 6. 4 

5 ov Set TO (3e\TLOV tear dperrjv dp^eiv Kol Seairo^eiv. oXw? (II) 
8 dvTe XpiJievoi rives, o5? oiovrai, SiKaiov TWO? (6 ydp VO/JLOS 
Sl/caiov TI) rrjv Kara 7ro\e/jiov 8ov\eiav riOeaai Sitcalav, 
cifAa Se ov fyacrLv. rr]v re yap dp^rjv evoe^erat, fir) i- 

25 Kaiav elvai rtov 7ro\e/A(ov, teal TOP dvd^iov oovkedeiv ovSa- 
fjLO) 1 ? civ (f>ai7j rt9 Sov\ov elvaC el Se fjuij, o-v/ji/Br/creTai rot)? (P. 9) 
evyeveardrovs elvai So/covvras oov\ovs elvai teal etc O~OV\CDV, edv 

6 <TVfij3y TTpaOrjvai \7j<pOevra^. ^ioirep avrovs ov ftovKovrat, 
\e<yeiv oov\ovs, d\\d roi)? /3ap(3dpov$. Kairou orav TOVTO \e- 

30 ywcrw, ovBev a\\o fyiTOvcnv TJ TO (frvcret 8ov\ov oTrep e 
dp%r)s elTTO/Jbev dvay/cr) yap elvai Tivas $dvcu rou? f^ev 

7 Travra^ov Sov Xovs roi)? 8e ovfta/jiov. TOP avTov Be rpoTrov K.CLI 10 

24 a/x,a] 6 Xwj II 1 P G M b T b L s (7^. a/xa p 1 in the margin), aTrXws apparently Ar. || 
27 /cat e/c 5ov\uv transposed to follow 1255 b 2 a7a$oV Schmidt |) 28 avTotis Monte- 
catino and perhaps P :i . Over this word p 2 has the gloss TOVS evyevds /cat 

which M s has in the text after \7](p0frTa.s 
O p 1 in the margin 



II 1 , 7p. a 

departs widely from that here given. 
Ilampke also takes 19 TOVTWV T&V \6ycov 
as a singular of one view and hence infers 
that aVepoi Xo7ot denotes one view also: 
M. Croiset, les opinions de nos adver- 
saires . 

cos ov Sei, epexegetic of \6yoi, the 
view namely that... . But Jackson fol 
lowing Heinsius makes it depend on 
in.davbi> : " plausibility to shew that it 
is not the right of superiority in virtue to 
rule". Why does Aristotle expose the 
weakness of (A)? lie admits euVota as 
the principle regulating the relations of 
citizens in the normal TroAtretat, but as 
between master and slave it is not to 
supersede the right of virtue to rule. 

5 21 Take 6 Xws with 
" Others again simply holding fast to 
something just and right as they suppose 
(for whatever is legal is just) admit the 
justice of slavery in accordance with the 
laws of war, but in the same breath 
withdraw the admission. For not only 
may the war have had an unjust origin, 
but further no one would call him, who 
is undeserving of slave s estate, a slave. 
Else it will follow that men who are 
held to be of the noblest birth are 
slaves or come of servile ancestry, if 
they" [or their ancestors] "happen to 
have been taken prisoners and sold " : 
as Plato was by Dionysios. Tl\eyiewof 
(c), 22 nvh, is substantially the common 
> with Its latent rrreon- 

sistencies. 6 Aws was taken by Hampke 
= embracing both the former views . 
Ridgeway (op. c. 130) objects that if 
Aristotle was enunciating another theory 
here, he would have used rt 5e . It 
will be found upon comparison of DC 
Aiiitna I. 5 10, 1 1 410 b 2 and Meteor. 
n. 3 14, 15 357 b 10, 12, that 6 Xws 
and en de are used in parallel clauses 
to introduce distinct objections, the order 
of the clauses being indifferent. 

6 28 Sioirep KT\] "Hence they 
refuse to call their own countrymen 
slaves, and only apply the term to bar 
barians": avrovs used absolutely foray- 
rot s < TOVS "EXX^as > which comes to 
the same thing as 33 avrovs. Eaton com 
pares the noble conduct of Callicratidas, 
Xen. Hell. i. 6, 14. 

30 ovSev d XXo KT\] In making this 
qualification they are really on their way 
to the principle of natural slavery laid 
down by us at the first: they are compelled 
to admit that in certain cases there is a 
distinction between two classes, the one 
who are everywhere, the others who are 
nowhere, slaves. Having thus reduced the 
intermediate view of (c) to its right sense 
Aristotle has no need to refute at length 
the extreme views of (A) and (B). 

7 32 iravraxov] Nic. Eth. V. 7. i, 
1 134 b 19, TO fj.kv (fivaei <diKacov> aKivrjTov 
/cat Tra.vTa.-xpv T W uvT-riv e xei SiVa^ti^Con- 
greve). TOV avrov KT\] Cp. III. 13. 2 17 eu- 
yeveia Trap 1 ^/cacrrois oi /cot Tt/iios. S USEM . (52) 

I. 6. 8] 

f 3 . 

1255 a 211255 b 1. 


Trepl evyevetas avrovs JJLGV jap ov /JLOVOV Trap avrols evye- (II) 
veis d\\d Travra^ov vo/Ai^ovcrw, roz)? Se fiapftdpovs O LKOL JJLO- 
35 voi>, ok ov TI TO fJiev a r jr\w^ evyeves /cal e\ev9epov TO S 
Kal r 

deicov 8 OTT d^-Cpolv e.yovov pi 

TIS av Trpocrfiire iv d^iwcreiev \arpiv ; 

8 oTav Se TOVTO X&yaxriv, ovSevl a\.\* rj dpeTy Kal KaKia 81,0- 

40 pi^ovcri TO Sov\ov Kal e\ev6epov Kal TOZ)? evyevels Kal TOU? 

255 b Svcryeveis. dfyovcri yap, waTrep et; dvOpwirov avflpcoTrov Kal IK 

33 avrovs IT 1 P 4 Pint., avrols P 3 S b T b and ist hand of P 2 (emended by con: 2 ) \\ 
Trap aurols F M s Plut. and perhaps P 1 || 35 /cat omitted in P 2 - 3 Q M b S b T Aid. and 
P 4 (rst hand), Ar. leaves /cat e\evdepov untranslated || 36 /cat before TJ is omitted by 
Bk. || e\e\6yr) for EXei T/ F M s || 37 ZK^OVOV Ar., ^Kyovoiv P 1 , exybvoiv T M s 
ps.4.6. Aid. Plut. e /c Yoj/otJ* P 2 Q M b , e/cycW S b T b || 38 a^twaete M s P 1 --- 4 - Aid. 
Plut. and P 3 (a later hand) j| 39 oMevi II 2 Ar. Plut. Bk., ovSev II 1 

35 d>s ov TI] " which implies the exist 
ence of an absolute, as well as a relative, 
nobility and freedom ". 

36 On the tragic poet Theodektcs of 
Phaselis, a contemporary and friend of 
Aristotle who is rather fond of quoting 
from him, see Susemihl s note (103) on 
Poetics n i, Bernhardy Griech, Litera- 
ttirgesch. II b p. 64 f., Welcker Die 
griech. Trag. in. 1069 ff. [also Cope 
Journal of CL and Sacred Philol. in. 
260 f., Int. to Rhetoric 53 f., note on 
Rhet. ii. 23. 3]. These lines are frag. 3 in 
Nauck s 7}-ag. Grace, frag. SUSEM. (53) 

8 39 OT<XV 8] From vi(iv). 8. 9, 
vni(v). i. 7 (cp. in. 13. 3, Rhet. I. 8. 5) 
we learn that true nobility is a combina 
tion of wealth with high excellence here 
ditary in a family, apery Kal TrXouros 
ctpxatos. How far this third or 

intermediate view of slavery and the 
limits within which it is justified as 
natural agrees with that of Aristotle 
himself, is more clearly seen from the 
discussion in IV (vii). 7 i 3, where 
see nn. (780, 781). The question there 
is, to what are we to ascribe the higher 
endowments and virtue which distin 
guish the Greeks from other races and 
make the latter their born slaves 1 Only 
Aristotle there more precisely restricts 
this relation to the Asiatic portion of the 
non-Hellenic nations, as indeed he does 
before in. 14. 6, dovXiKurepoi ra rjOrj ol 
, oi 5 irepl TT]V 

r&v irepl TT?I> EupwTTT?^. The other 
references are i. 2 4, 5 8 f. , 6 4, 7 
3 f-, 8 12: iv (vn). 2 15, 1 6, 9 
1 8, 14 21 with the not - 

In his whole doctrine Aristotle follows, 
in the main, the indications of his master. 
Plato in like manner condemns the en 
slavement of Hellenes by Hellenes ; . 
v. 469 B f., 471 A f^,- Ideas which 

__ . , A, 

Politicus ., J_ , 

see on I. 5 9 n. 
(46) and the next note: Introd. p. 24 f. ; 
Zeller op. c. II i 755 f. [Eng. tr. Plato 
p. 458 f.] SUSKM. "(54) 

1255!) i dio{jo-i, KT\] So above 5 10 
/3oyXerat...7roXtTt/coi fiiov. Cp. ill. 13 3 
n., Rlict. I. 9 33, Theognis 535 f. ouVore 
Soi/Xet ?; KefiaXy iOela Tretyvxev | dXX at et 
cr/coXt?;, /caux^a Xo^oi/ ^%et. | cure yap e/c 
cr/ct XXTjs p65a 0uerat ouS vaKivOos \ oflre 
TTOT e/c Soi X^s reKvov e\ev6epi.oi> (Ca- 
merarius) : also Plato Cratylus 394 D 
(Schiller). Oncken remarks : " what 
Aristotle requires however as the visible 
and palpable mark of innate slavery is 
not the deformity which Theognis has 
in view, but a greater endowment of 
rough muscular force. He overlooks the 
fact that the domestic service of the slave 
hardly demands more strength than the 
military service of the freeman, who 
needs a good deal besides mere erect 
stature". SUSEM. (55) 



[I. 6. 8 


ryiveo-Oai Orjplov, ovrw /cal ef dyaOwv dyaOov. rj Se (f>v- (II) 
pev TOVTO iroielv, 7ro\\d/c^ pevToi ov Svvarai,. 

Tivd \6yov r) dfLfacrjBiJT rjffi i, real 20 

Sov\oi ol Se e\ev6epoi, 
TO TOLOVTOV, wv a-vfjufyipei TW 

iv KOI Slfcaiov /cal Bel TO 
r)v 7re(f)VKacriv dp^rjv dp^eiv, wcrre 
do-v/jifybpws eVrlz^ dfjifyolv (TO 
Kal ro3 o\w Kal crw/aart /cal 

Ti TOV SeCTTTOTOV, oloV /Ji ^fV^6l> TL 

Sto /cal o-veov 21 

9 on /jiep ovv 
5 OVK elcrlv 01 /uuev 
KOI OTI ev Ticri 
$ov\veLV TO) Se TO 
dp^eaOai TO 
10 Kal Seo-TTO^ew, TO Se 
10 d aiiTO av/Ji^epei TO) 


L TL /cal (f)i\ia Sov\w /cal SevTroTrj TT/OO? 


9 1255 b 2 yevecr6ai. M s P 1 - 4 6 Q T b |] dya6ov, <Kal c/c 5ov\w Sov\ov> Schmidt, 

f\ a^ cp. a 27 || 3 TOVTO after Tro^lv M s P 1 || 7ro\\d/cts ^VTOL ov Ar. iro\\afas, ov /UL^VTOI 

"* m Plut. Bk. which, though unsatisfactory, might perhaps be defended: see Ditten- 

A ^^"Tberger <?/>. c. p. 1371!. II 5 The text can hardly be sound : <et oi/ccu> OVK Camot, 

Bk. 2 , perhaps the best suggestion; OVK <det>? Susem. 2 , OVK <ai>a/j.<f)i.(T[3r]TriTus> or 

oi>x < a-rravTaxov > ? Schmidt formerly: <ort> Bojesen; ou /c is omitted by W b Aid. 

Lambin Gottling, el for 4 /cat and <^ ou> before <5?jXoi Lambin, OVK for 4 ovv Gottling, o: 

fj.ev <ei yU.7?> Thurot || ot yU^ 0ucret] 0t cret <rtves> ot /xe^ and 6 <d7j\ov de> /cat 6 rt 

Schmidt now edits || fivcrei wanting in M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added in the margin by 

p 1 ) || 7 TO is omitted before oeffTro ^Lv by II 3 || TOV ^v and 8 TOV 5 Ar. Nickes, 

who would prefer 6 rots ^v...^ rots 5e...roi)j fj,ev...8 TOVS 5 || 8 In M 8 P 1 Ar. apxeiv 

and d pxecr^at are transposed || 12 rou o-c^uaros in some older mss. probably came 

after (j.epos where it is repeated by T M s and P 1 (ist hand) 

2 r\ 8e (}>v(ri-s KT\] So above 5 10 
o-v/u<,paivei...\evdtpuv. F i^teloor rTTemar k s 
with -truth that this admission quite inva- 
lidates all practical application of Aristo- 
tie s theory. i It is even pnssi-bte-for-a 
Ureek to be a natural slave, for a bar- 
barian, though an Asiatic (see on I. 2. 
4 and above n. 54), to be a natural free- 
man : ^. g. Hermeias, Aristotle s friend 
and the uncle of his wife, who had actually 
been a slave: seeonii. 7. 17. Hence the 
non-Hellene may even prove to be the 
natural master of the Hellene. SUSEM. 

9 5 OVK eurlv] Fortunately we can 
check the text (see Crit. Notes) by the 
directly opposed statement with which 
c. 6 opens, by 6, 10, and the next 
words, line 6, %v TKTI KrX " in certain 
cases there is a clearly marked distinc- 
tion of this sort, where namely ...... " 

9 TO 8e KaKc3s] sc. dpxetv. 

10 TO -ydp avTo KTX] See i 3 n.( j). 

ii 6 8e 8ovXos...i2 

fxe pos] This is said of property 
generally and of the child NIC. Eth. V. 6. 
8 quoted on 4 5 above. SUSEM. (57) 
See however Jackson s note ad loc. 

12 8io...i3 irpos aXXi^Xovs] In Nic. 
Eth. vm. n 6, 7, 1161 a 32 ff., itis said 
that there can be no friendship between 
master and slave qua slave : ev ols yap 
/m. rjdev KOIVQV eaTiv ry dpxovTi /cat o.px- 
/^w, ovSe 0tXt a f ovdt yap 5t /catof. The 
relation is like that of a craftsman to 
his tools, of soul to body, of master to 
slave. w0eXetrat [tv yap TrdvTa raura 
UTTO T&V xp^lJ-tvuv (cp. TO avTo avjji<pepei of 
the text), 0tXta 5 OVK (TTiv....6 ydp Sou- 
Xos 2/j.^vxov opyavov, TO 5 opyavov d\f/vxos 
5ov\os. rj fj,v ovv 8ov\os, OVK CTTIV 0tXta 
irpos avTov, 77 avdpuiros- 5o/cet ydp 
elvai TI diKacov iravri dvdpuTry irpos irdvTa. 
TOV Swd/^evov Koivuvfifrai vo^ov Kal (rvvdrj- 
KTJS, Kal (f)i\ta 5??, Ka9* oaov dvOpwTros. 
Zeller II ii 692 f., following Ritter, rightly 
calls this an inconsistency which does the 
philosopher honour. The author of the 


I. 7. 2] 

1255 b 2 1255 b 21. 


rot? 8e /AT) TOVTOV rbv rpoTrov, (II) 
7 aXXa /cara VOJJLOV KOI ftiacrOela-i,, rovvavrlov) (fravepov Be 


Tifcrj, ovSe nraaai aXX^Xat? al dp^al, wcnrep Tti>e? <f>a- (p. 10) 
aiv. r) /jiev yap eXevOepwv (pvcrei, r} Se $ov\cov ecrrlv, KOI 
19 77 fjiev oiKOvofjiiKr) fjiovap^ia (/JLOvap^elrai jap vra? oitcos], 
2 77 &e 7ro\LTLKr) e\ev6epwv KOL lawv apx*!- o yLtez^ ouz> SecrTro- 22 
TT;? oJ \eyerai Kara eTrtcrT^/u,?;^, aXXa T&> roiocrSe elvai, 

14 TOUTOJI ] TOtoi/rots Susem. 1 2 , Totoirrots < drat > ? Susem., TotouTots < /cai > 
Schmidt at one time: Totiruv was suspected by Schneider and Koraes, ourws c^/cetw- 
M^ois Koraes || ij&utdvois transposed to follow 15 vo/ioi Schmidt || 15 cfravepbv 
...20 apx 7 ? transposed to follow 1256 a i rpoirov Schmidt || 16 /cat before e/c 
would perhaps come better after those words 
Eudcmian Ethics, vii. 9. 2 1241 b 17 ff., bute the doctrine, without qualification, 

withdraws the concession : since there is 
the same relation between soul and body, 
craftsman and tools, master and slave, in 
these cases there is no association (KOLVU- 
via) possible, ou yap 5u ecrrtV, oAAci TO 
/u,^ %v, TO 5e TOV evos (the two members of 
such a relation are not independent), ovoe 
di-aipeTW TO ayaBov e/care/oy, cxXXa d/m.(f)o- 
rtpuv TO evos ov &>e/ca ecrTiv (the good of 
the one is not separable from the good of 
the other, the good of both is the good 
of that one of the two for whose sake the 
other exists). TO Te yap crw/xd kvriv 
opyavov (rvfj.<pvTOv, /cat TOU de&iroTov 6 8ov- 
Xos aicTTrep fj.6pt.ov /cat opyavovacpai- 
PCTOV. That even a slave is a man is 
emphasized in another fragment of Phile 
mon, besides the one quoted on 3 4, 
viz. Eot/ct~6 / u,ei os 28 : KO.V SouXos 17 Tts, 


tarw, ov dV^pwTroj 77. Cp. Becker Cliari- 
kles in. 12 (ed. 2), Eng. tr. p. 357. Con 
sult further Pol. IV (vii). 8 14 n. 
(801); i. 2. 3 n. (7); in. 6. 6. SUSEM. 
(57 b) Comp. F. A. Paley s Euripides, 
Pref. to vol. i. pp. xiii f. with reff. there 
given, esp. Hd. 728, Melanippe fr. 506 
(515), Phrixusfr. 823 (828) : also Oncken 
n. 33 ff- 

c. 7 AeoTTOTefa. then, or rttle over 
slaves, is not the same as statecraft : i . 
Nor does the relation of SecriroTTjs depend 
lipon science: 2. In ivhat sense there 
may be a science of the duties ( i ) of slaves 
(2) of slaveowners (the latter quite distinct 
from 77 KTrjTiKrj, sc. dovXwv) : 3 5. 

1 17 nvls] Plato. See on i i 
n. (2). SUSEM. (58) 

" It is plain that here and i i Aristotle 
is thinking of Plat. Polit. 258 E sq. esp. 
259 B. It is however a mistake to attri- 

to Plato, who at 268 D introduces a long 
and elaborate myth with the express 
intention of warning us, that though the 
shepherd-king of the theocratic period 
exercised all regulative functions indis 
criminately, this state of things ended 
with the Saturnian age. See by all means 
274 E sqq. From this point to the end of 
the dialogue the Eleate is mainly en 
gaged in discriminating the ?roXiTt/c6s 
from a host of rivals. Clearly the doc 
trine in question is at variance with the 
whole tenor of the Republic, May we 
not attribute it, on the strength of Xenoph. 
Memorab. in. 4 12, Oecon. 13 5, to 
Socrates ? " (Jackson) . 

19 TJ (j,ev olKOvofJtiKi^...2o ctpX 1 ]] Com 
pare IV (Vii). 8 4 (ef ofJioiwv), VI (IV). 
ii 8 (e lawv /cat 6/iotW), also II.2 6, 
III. 16 2, i7 i and ;/. (133) on II. 2 4. 
On the other hand see in. 4 5 with n. 
(471). SUSEM. (58 b) 

20 A similar distinction between 77 TWV 
\evdp(jjv /cat (ff(jov ap^rj and 77 5e0"7roTt/c?} 
is seen in Nic. Eth. v. 6 4, 8, where 
Jackson refers to Pol. iv (vii). 14 6, 7, 
19. See his notes. 

2 21 ov XeyeTCU Kara eincrTTffjLT]v] 
As is asserted in the passage of the Poli 
tic us ; cp. c. i 2 n. (2), 3 4. dXXd 
TO> TOiocrSe etvcu] But does this latter 
at once exclude the former ? As was 
shown in n. (54) on c. 6 8, Plato is 
very far from denying the one because he 
asserts the other. He too, like Aristotle, 
regards the more capable as the natural 
ruler, but for that very reason assigns the 
perfect art of ruling, of whatever kind, to 
those alone who in the strict sense have 
knowledge, i.e. to the philosophers : for, 
on the Socratic principle that all virtue or 

,0 nOMTIKON A. 7. [1.7. 2 

cuoici)? $e /cal 6 SouXo? real 6 e\6V0epos eTriarrj /AT] 8 av (II) 

eirf Kal SecrTrorLfcr) KOI Sov\iKr), Sov\i/crj uev o iav Trep 6 ev 

2 4 ^vparcovcrais eTrai^evo ev (e /cet yap Xaufiavwv rt? [AicrOov 

3 e&lSao-fce ra eyKVK\ia ^laKov^^ara TOI)? TratSa?), et?/ 8 z/ Kal 

eVl rr\elov rovrcov [JiaOria-is, olov otyorcoiririKr) Kal ra\\a ra 

roiavra yewrj rrjs $iaKov[as. ecrrt jap erepa erepcov ra fjuev 

evn/Jiorepa epya ra S dvay/caiorepa, Kal Kara rr)v rrapoifjbiav 

79 dov\os Trpo dovXov, deo-norrjs rrpo Se(T7rorou. 

4 a I uev ovv roiavrai Traaai 8ov\ircal eTricrrrj/jLai, elcri Seajro- 2:1 

riKTj S eVtcrT^yLtTy earlv TJ ftprja-ri/cr) Sov\cov. 6 <yap SeaTro- 

TT;? OVK ev TCO KrdaOai rot)? $ov\ov$, aXX Iv ru> ^prjaOai, 

Soi;Xo69. eari S avrrj rj ImarrifJbri ov$ev /jieya e^ovaa ovSe 

34 creuvov a yap rov $ov\ov erricrraaOai $el rroielv, eKelvov 8el 

5 ravra erricrraaOai emrarreiv. Sco ocrot? e^ovaia urj avrovs 

KaKorraOelv, eTTirpOTros \a[Jb(3dvei ravrrjv rr}v rifJir)V, avrol 

23 ev rals M s P 1 Susem. 1 wrongly, see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1362, ev [rais] 
Susem. 2 || 24 e-rraidevev II 2 Ek. || 26 TOVTWV} r&v TOLOVTWV II 2 Bk. || OI/ OTTOU/CI} 
P ->.3.Qgb T b Ald> Bkf 6^ 07rot7?K7 ) p^ ^OTTOUK^ Ar. || 27 erepa] fy-ya QS T b Aid. 
and ist hand in P 3>4> (7^. eVe/aa in the margin of P 4 , the right reading is inserted in P 3 
by a later hand, but subsequently erased) 

excellence (aperr)} arises from knowledge, tion (Ludw. Schneider). See IV (vil). c. 

philosophers have in his eyes the highest 8 f.; c. 14 12 ff. SUSEM. (62) 

excellence in every respect. Aristotle 4 32 OVK ev TW KTctcrOcu] Below 

has not taken pains enough over his refu- c. 8 2 ris yap eVrai xpv ffo f j -^ >l T0 s 

tationhere. In the ^//^/^heismore accu- /card r^v olKiav Trapa rr)v OIK. ; III. 4. 1 1 

rate, beginning with a successful attack TTJV irepl TO. avayKaia < dpxw SeffTroTiKrjv > , 

upon the Socratic principle which Plato a iroielv eTrtcrracr^at TOV apxovr OVK 

accepted : see Zeller op. c. II ii 627 f. ava-yKcdov a\Xa xP^ ff ^ ai - /^aXXov. Su- 

SUSEM. (59, 60) SEM. (63) 

Kara in virtue of, as in Ka66. The 33 ovScv (Jte -ya ^x ovo " a ] IV ( VI1 )- 3- 2 

term master is not applied to anyone ov8v yap TO ye dovXy, y 5ov\os, 

because of his knowledge, but from his ae^ov, VI (iv). 15. 3 at 5 

being of a given character. <TWV e7rt/ieAetwv> /cat irpos as, aV 

3 27 TO. [Jitv VTi(xoTpa KT\] The crt, rdrrofcrt 8ov\ovs. But see I. 13. 14 

latter are the conditions for bare existence, and n. (123). SUSEM. (64) 

the former for the ennobling refinement 5 36 The overseer, eTrtrpoTros, or 

and perfecting of existence. SUSEM. (61) house-steward, Ta/uLas, was himself a 

29 A verse of the Pankratiast , a slave : Pseud. -Arist. Occon. 1.5 i 1344 a 

comedy by Aristotle s younger contem- 26, 6 5 1345 a 8 ff., Xen. Occon. 12. 2, 

porary Philemon, frag. 2. (J. G. Aristoph. Knights g^ f. : Becker Charikles 

Schneider). But if one master thus dif- in. 23 (ed. 2), Eng. tr. p. 363. Yet no 

fers from another, it is implied that in the doubt Greeks by birth were readily taken 

activities of freemen there is a similar for this office, as well as for that of ?rat- 

difference; that thus all human occupa- 07^70?. SUSEM. (64) 

tions exhibit an ascending scale from the Translate : hence all who have the 

lowest and most mechanical work up to means of escaping personal discomfort 

the highest and most intellectual, which employ an overseer to take this charge 

Aristotle calls (diaywyfj) employment of and themselves the while engage in pub- 

leisure, as distinct from work or occupa- lie affairs or in study. 

I. 8. 1] 1255 b 22 1256 a 1. 

oe iro\iTevoi>T(iL TI fyCKocro^ovcriv. rj Be 

(f)OTepQ)V TOVTWV, OLOV [//] BlKdLa 7rO\/LLlKrj 


ere pa dp- (I I) 
ovaa [rj Orjpev- 

8 7rep\ fj,ev ovv Bov\ov KOL SecrTrorov TOVTOV SiwpicrOw TOV III 
1256 a rpoTTov o\a)s Be Trepi Trdaqs tcrrjO ews real %pr}/jt,aTicrTifcfjs 6ew- 

38 [??] Susem., 77 Schnitzer wrongly: ?[5t/cata] or ?[rts ovaa] Susem. || [77 drjpev- 
TiKrj] Susem. 2 , [rj] Jackson || Conring and Spengel suspect the whole sentence 37 
77 de KTr)TiKrj...$8 6r)pevTiKr}, Schmidt all from 37 77 8e /CTTiTt/CTj... 1256 a 3 /x^pos Tt ?)i/ 

37 T] 8e KT\] With KTIJTIKT} supply 
8ov\ui>. But it may be inferred from c. 
8 12, 5t6 /cat 77 Tro\e/J.iKr} (pvcrei KTrjTiKij TTWS 
ZffTat (77 yap OrjpevTLKr} /mepos avrr/s), fj Sec 
Xprjcrdai Trpos re TCI Orjpia /cat rw^ dvdpuirnov 
6 croi 7re0i /c6Tes apxecr^at ^77 6e\ovcrii>, that 
under the one genus offensive war Ari 
stotle includes two species: (i) the chase, 
a war against wild animals, (2) war con 
ducted for the capture of slaves. 

irpos roi)s 


If this be so, he knows nothing of an 
art of man-hunting : and the words at 
the end, 38 77 O^pevriK^, must be an inter 
polation. Cp. further I. 2 4 n. (n), 6 
8 nu. (54, 56), iv (vn). 2 15 ou 
Set irdvTwv TretpoVtfat deaTrofeiv, d\\a 
T&V SecrTrcxTTu;! , tJouirep ovde 6r)peveiv eirl 
doivrjv rj Ovcriav dv 6 pcoTrous d\\a TO 
rrpos TOVTO dr/pevrbv nu. (727, 728): IV 
(vil). 14 21, where one object of military 
training is TO 8e(nr6 fei.v TCOV a^iwv 8ov- 
\eueii>. SUSEM. (65) 

This view, that dr/pevTiKr) is a species 
of 7To\e^tt/c77, Jackson cannot accept. On 
the contrary, from 8 12 (just quoted) he 
infers that to Aristotle (as to Plato Soph. 
222 B, Laws 823 B) TroXe/xt/cT? is a species 
of 6r/pevTiKr) : see his note on that passage. 
He translates here, " the art of acquiring 
slaves, that is, the just art of acquiring 
slaves, is distinct from both of these," 
from dov\iKr) and 5ea7roTt/c7;, "being a 
species of the art of war or the art of 

cc. 8 n irepl irdiTTjs KTTJ crews KCU 

c. 8 In what relation does 
aTiKT) stand to Economic? Is it (i) the 
same science, or (2) a branch of it, or (3) 
a subsidiary science ? It is not the same, 
for it serves a different purpose, accumula 
tion : i, 2. Whether it is a branch or 
not is disputed, and must be decided for 

each of the various species q/ xP r )f jiaTiffTLK; h 
separately: 3. 

Review of the various natural modes of 
subsistence: 4 12. 

The natural art of production (/o^Tt/CT?), 
which has for its object the accumulation 
of natural wealth within due limits, is a 
branch of Economic : 13 15. 

For this section of the work consult 
Ludw. Schneider Die staatswirthschaft- 
lichen Lehrcn usiv (The theories of Po 
litical Economy in the Politics], pt. I 
Deutsch-Krone, 1868, pt. n Neu-Rup- 
pin, 1873 : Glaser De Aristotelis doc- 
trina de divitiis (Konigsberg 1856. 4) 
with Bendixen s review in Pkilologus 
xvi. 498 f. : Ilampke Bemerkungen (Re 
marks on Pol. I.) Lyck, 1863 : Schnitzer 
Zu Aristotcles Politik in Eos 1. 1864. 
499 516 : Susemihl on Pol. I. cc. 8 n 
in Khein. Mits. XX. 1865. 504 517: 
Buchsenschiitz Zu Aristote/es Politik i. cc. 
8 ii in Jahrb. fiir PInlol. xcv. 1867. 
477-482,7136. SUSEM. (66) 

There can be little that Ari 
stotle wrote with especial reference to 
Plato : Rep. II. 370 B 372 A, Laws XI. 
918 A 920 C (cp. vni. 831 E, 849 I)), 
Soph. 219 A f., 222 B ff., 223 C, D, Politicus 
287 C 290 A, etc. 

1 1256 a i xP T !H l aTlorTLK1 l is applied 
(i) to the_ whole art of acquisition, being 
thus completely identical with /CTTJTJ/CTT". 
In this sense the term was introduced at 
3 3 ( C P- 4 ! ") an< l this holds through 
out c. 8, and in 9 4. In a narrower 
sense it is used (2) for the acquisition by 
exchang^_jtteTa/3X7/Tt/c77, of the kind of 
wealth which in Aristotle s view is un 
natural, i.e. not for use, but to exchange 
again at a profit. In this sense xpTi/xa- 
TiffTiKr) money-making, profit-making 
= /caTTTjXt/crj trade. So from c. 9 i 
onwards. Again in 9 12, 10 2 it is 
used (3) forthat part of the art of ac 
quisition which, as opposed to (2), is 
directed" solely to natural wealth and is 
intimately connected with Economic. 
Plainly (3) = 77 dvayxala 


A. 8. 

[I. 8. 1 

Kara TOP v^y^/mevov Tpojrov, eireiTrep KOI 6 Bov- (III) 
Xo? 1179 KTtjaews /zepo? TI r]V. TrptoTov pev ovv aTroprjcreiev 
dv rt? Trorepov r} %prjfjiaTi(TTiKr] r/ avrrj rfj oiKOVo/AiKf) eaTiv 
5 f) /Jt,epos TI r) vTrrj per t/cr} , Kal el VTrrjpeTiKr), irorepov w? 77 
KepKiBoTroirjTifcr) rfi vfyavTMcf) 77 w? r/ %a\fcovp<yiKr/ rfj dv- 
BpiavTOTroiia (ov yap (DaavTCDS VTrrjperovvw, a\V r) pev op- 
2 java Trape^ei, rj Be rrjv v\rjv \eyco Be V\TJV TO viroKei- 
fjievov, eg ov TI a7TOTe\elrai epyov, olov vtydvrr) fjiev epia 
10 dvBpLavTOTTOLO) Se %a\Kov). (p- " 

ori, }Jiev ovv ow% i] avrrj rfj OiKovo^iKfj rj ^pr)fJLaTio~TiKr) ) 2 
orj\ov (r^? fJLev <ydp TO TropiaacrOai, r^9 oe TO ^pr^o-acrOaL Ti? 
<ydp ecrTai r} ^prjao/jievrj rot? KCLTO, Trjv oltclav Trapci TT)V OIKOVO- 
14 }JiiKr)v ;) TTOTepov Be fiepos avrr}? earl TI TJ eTepov elSo?, e 

1256 a 5 [17] vTrrjperiKov, Kal el VTrr/peTiKov Bender, certainly not right. That M> 
omits 97 is quite unimportant || 6 KepKidoirouKr] P 24 QS b T b Aid. Bk. and a later 
hand in P 3 , /cep/ctSoTrou/ci} P 3 (ist hand) || 9 Zpiov F P 1 Susem 1 2 * || 10 x a ^ K ^ T P 1 

Susem. 1 

IJ T ? ocwo/x-i/Cfl ? 

TJ corr. 2 of P 2 and Bk.) rf? 

t/c?) Sylburg for oiKOVOjMKri (rj OLKO- 
13 ?rapd] ?rept M d P 3 S b T b 

(2) = 17 jUTj dvajKaia of c. 9 18; and (i) 
the widest range of the term includes 
both, the getting of goods as well as the 
getting of gain. SUSEM. (69) 

i Kara TOV vcfxTj-yrjiJievov rpoirov] "in 
accordance with the procedure adopted," 
namely, that from part to whole. See 
i 3 n- (4); 3 i (29): Hi. i 2 w. 
(434). SUSEM. (66) 

eireiTrep...^] " since the slave is, as we 
saw, included under the head of property," 
being defined as /cr^/xa, a chattel. 

5 Kal el UTr-rip. KT\] The more precise 
way in which this third possibility is ex 
pressed leads us to anticipate a decision 
in its favour (Hampke). However when 
the decision comes to be made, 10 i 
3, it only has a preference given it ; it is not 
exclusively adopted, as Hampke thinks. 
That the question, in which of the two 
senses x/ 37 ?/"-- is auxiliary to Economic, is 
never taken up is most surprising. We 
can only conjecture the answer from 
passing hints : see on 10 2. SUSEM. (67) 

7 r\ JJ.6V 6p i ya,va...TJ 8c rr\v v\r\v] 
The one provides tools to work with, the 
other raw material to work up (Oncken). 
SUSEM. (67 to) 

This distinction comes from Plato Poli- 
ticus 287 C, 
8pyava irepl 

288 D, E rb 5 iraai rot/rots 

Trapexov e u>v Kal ev oh 
ovpyovffiv OTTOcrat TWV Texvuiv vvv 
(Jackson). So too the conception of 
VTrrjpeTCKal rexyat. comes from the Poli- 
ticus 281 E : 6 crat ^v TO 7rpay/u.a avrb ^ 
dTj/j-Lovpyovcri., rals o dTj/ULovpyoixracs opyava. 
irapa<TKcvdfav(n.i> ... ravras i^ev ^vvairiovs 
<r^x va ^>- The Eleate quotes ras /j.ev 
irepi re drpaKrovs Kal /cep/ci <5as as the 
first examples of ^vvainai rex- (Eaton). 

2 8 vXi^v TO tnroKtp.evov KT\] Plato 
denotes this by TO TrpwToyevts avdpuTrois 
KTrjfj.a Politicals 288 E : but v\rj occurs in 
Phil. 54 C (prifM or) yeveaeoos /u.ei> 
J opyava Kal Tracrav vXrjv Trapa 

12 TLS ydp KT\] See . (63) on c. 7 
4. SUSEM. (68) What art 

is to use the household goods if it be not 
Economic (Trapd except) ? 

14 Two alternatives are given in 
i, rf /x^pos TL TJ virrjpeTLKr), and it is 
not easy to see what has become of the 
latter in the statement here Trbrepov utpos 
7) eTepov eTSos and in 3, 17 >) 
iroTepov /uepos TI. rj eTepov yevos. 
For reasons given in Excursus ill. on Bk. 
I. p. 209 q. v., both alternatives of i 
should be supposed included under /i^pos, 
that term being so loosely used as to in 
clude even an auxiliary science. SUSEM. 

I. 8. 5] 

1256 a 2 1256 a 23. 


] 3 j>i(TJBr]rricriv, el^ap/ ecrrt rov ^p^^aTiariKov Oewprjorai TroOev XP*1~ 
Kal KTrjais ecTTai. r] Se KTrjai? 7ro\\d 7rpLi\ rj(j)6 l^eprj Kal 6 
ware rrputTOV r\ yeajpyLKr) irorepov fjuepos n r?;? ol- 
rj erepov TL 761/09, Kal Ka06\ov 77 irepl rrjv rpo- 
19 <f)r)v eTTifJLeXeia [KCU KTTJCTI^. 

4 d\\d fjirjv ei$r) 76 7ro\\a rpo<pf)s, Sib Kal jBiot 7ro\\ol Kal 3 
TWV ^(f)0)V Kal TWV dv6pw7rwv elcriv ov yap olov re V/^ dvev 
rpo<?79, cocrTe al $ta(j)opal rfjs rpoffrr/s roi)? /3/OU9 7re7roir]Ka(TL &ia- 
5 (f)epovra$ T&V ^(pwv. TWV re yap Orjpiwv ra fjiev dyeXaia rd $e (TTTO- 

15 el yap] etVep Montecatino needlessly, since Vahlen (Poetic p. i28f. ed. 3) has 
shown that el yap can be used in the same sense. Even then Vahlen s comma after 
16. &JTCU must be a full stop. But perhaps 5ia / ,0i<T/377T?7(nz . et yap...KTrj<ris Zarai, * 
with the punctuation of previous cdcl., is right || 16 &TTCU, 77 8rj KTTJ<TIS Bernays || 
17 * * <l><TTe Conring Susem. 1 The lacuna began with cos or wWe/>, Hampke Schnitzer. 
Other proposals fruitless: see my large critical edition, ad loc. and Addenda || OLKOVO- 
jtuKTjs Garve, xp^arto TIKTJS F II Ar. Bk. || 19 [/cat Krrj<ns] ? Susem.: /cat 
Stahr || 22 7re7rot?7/ca<n after Sta^e/aoiras M s P ] || 23 re omitted by M s P 4 

clothing tools, all things in general which 
Aristotle calls instruments for life and 
wellbeing, including slaves if directly 
produced or acquired by plunder without 
resort to exchange. If so, Exchange 
is the 5eurepoi>. This view is supported 
by the actual use of rpo(p-^ in a wider 
sense than food, for sustenance generally ; 
"subsistence," 8, 10 i, 3. (In these 
passages acquisition by exchange must be 
understood as well as that branch of XP 1 ? 
/xartcTTt/cT} which, because directed to 
procuring the requisite subsistence, really 
belongs to economic science: but this does 
not affect the present question.) 
Or, (ii) if all that is meant is direct pro 
duction and appropriation of food, in the 
strict sense of the term, then we must 
look for " secondly " in the remarks on 
the procurement of clothing and tools 
from the proceeds of the chase or from 
animals under domestication, n, and 
on the capture of slaves, 12. In any 
case, whatever the grounds for supposing 
the text defective (see on 12 n. 74), 
this is not one. SUSEM. (70) 

irorepov is dependent, like iroOev line 
15, upon effri TOU %p. Oeuprjcrai. 

4, 5 That the way in which animals 
support themselves determines their mode 
of life is more fully stated Hist, animal. I. 
i. 23, 487 b 33 ff., vin. i. n, 589 a 
4 ff.; and the proof is given in detail ib. 
viii. cc. 2 ii. Under Kapirofidya are 
included animals who feed on berries, 

3 15 Vahlen (see ciitical notes) 
takes ft yap to mean "if namely" as in 
Alkidamas DC soph, n, 12 a/o oi)/c evades 
rj/ n,\\7]i> TLVO. iroi.f to dai. fj.eXer rji \6ywv ; 
el yap oi rots ovofJ-affiv e^eipyaffiMevoi... 
aTTtcrrtas /cat (pOovov ras rtDi aKovbvTWv 
yvu/nas e/x,7rt7rXao-t, and Aris. AV/t A III. 17. 
1 1 el yap A%tAAe"a \eyuv Il^Xea e?rat^e?, 
etra Ata/coj/, etra rw ^eo^, o^totws 5^ /cat 
fodpiav, TJ (ms. ^) rd /cat ra Trotet 17 
roLovSe eariv. Elsewhere 701/9 appears 
redundant, or rather, no apodosis is ex 
pressed to the sentence introduced by it : 
Nic. Eth. vin. 8. 6 ot x/ 3 ^ " 6 /"- ^ Ka i 1 ?- 
5e?s e?rt irXelov di.a^evov(nv ews 7ap (so 
long namely as) dV iropifactLv -fjdovas TJ 
w0e\etas dXX^Xots : so e?ret 701/3 Rlict. II. 
25. 10, 77 7ap Pf/. VI (IV). 8. 6, ore /J-ev 
yap viii (v). i. 8. " See however Spengel 
Aris. Poet. ti. Vahlcns neueste Bearbei- 
. 138"." (Susemihl). 

1 6 The elements of wealth enumerated 
in Rhet. I. 5 7 (and Pol. n. 7 21) are 
777$, x ( * } P i0} " KTTJCTIS, en 5e eir i.Tr\wv /cr^crts 
/cat ^offKfjf^aTuiv Kal avdpaTroSwv : also vo- 
uiff/jiaTos Tr\T)6os which, according to c. 9 
below, is not true wealth. 

17 irpwrov] There is no word like 
detjrepov which expressly corresponds to 
this, cp. Poet. 13 2. What, we may 
ask, answers to it in substance? Either 
(i) the expression is again inexact, and 77 
irepl TT)v rpo<t>r)v eTrt^Xeta must be ex 
tended to. the industries concerned with 
all the other necessaries of life shelter 




[I. 8. 5 

d (TTIV, OTrorepws crv^epei Trpos rr)v Tpo<J>r)v avTols $ia TO (III) 
25 rd fjiev ^a)o<pdya ra Se Kap7TO(f)dya ra Se 7rafjL(f)dya avr&v elvai, 
ware Trpos r9 pacrrwvas /ecu rrjv a ipGcriv Trjv TOVTGOV rj fyvcris roz)? 
/3/OU9 avr&v o~iu)pi,(Tv, eVel S ou TGWTO e/cdo-rw rj&v /card $v- 
criv a\\a erepa erepois, tcai avrwv TWV ^wocfrdycov KOI rwv 
6 /cap7ro(f>dya)v ol {3ioi 777309 d\\rj\a SiecrTao-iv ofJioicos Se 
30 fcal TWV dvOpcoTTCov. TTO\V yap biafyepovcriv ol TOVTWV /Slot. 4 
ol nev ovv dpyoraroi, vofidc es elcriv (q yap airo TWV rjfjue- 
pcov Tpotyr) fypwv dvev TTOVOV ylverat, a"%o\d%ovo"i,v dvayrcaiov 
Se o^ro? /ji6ra/3d\\Lv rot? KTrjveort Sid ra? vofjids icai 
34 avrol dvay/cd^ovrai crvvaKo\ov6elv> cbcnrep yecopylav ^axrav 
7 yewpyovvres) ot 8* aTro Or] pas ftwcrt, xal Or] pas erepoi ere- 
pas, olov o i /ji6i> diro \r)(JTeias, o l 8 aft d\ieias, OCTOL \i- 

25 TO, 8e 7ra/j.(pd ya omitted by the ist hand in P 1 (supplied by p 1 in the margin), TO, 
5e by M s || 26 /cat] /card Bernays, perhaps rightly || 30 TTO\V] TroXXot P 4 S 1 T b 
Aid. and probably also Q, mnltis (?) William || 31 ow] yap P apparently || 33 
/j,eTaj3d\\ei.i> after rots /cr^ecrt M s P 1 || 36 aXieias Aid. dXecas jVpP 1 - 3 4 

roots, fruit and vegetables , so that the 
term is wider than Troyfiaya. = herbivorous. 
In Hist, animal. crapKO(pdyos carni 
vorous is chiefly used : fyofidyos hardly 

5 26 pao-Tcovas facilities : "to enable 
them to get at their food and capture it." 
By TOVTWV understand fya primarily, 
though Kap-n-os would be included. Ber 
nays reads /card for /cat : "to give them 
facilities for the capture of their food." 

6 8 Smith Wealth of nations 
Introd. Chap., Mill Pol. Econ. I. pp. n 
ff. rightly place lowest in the scale the 
savages who depend upon casual hunting 
or fishing, although in such a life fits of 
prolonged and strenuous exertion alternate 
with periods of indolence. In Homer 
the cannibal Cyclopes are a pastoral 
people. As Aristotle thought that all 
domesticated animals had once been wild, 
Hist. anim. I. i. 29 488 a 30 ff., he 
must have overlooked the labour of 
taming them ; cp. n. above on 5 7. 

31 The Scythians, or such North 
African tribes as Herodotos describes, 
IV. 1 86, would represent these vo/j.d8es. 
They are wholly distinct from the non- 
migratory voyttets of Hellenic democracies, 

VII (VI). 4. II. 

32 "The cattle being forced to shift 
their quarters for pasturage the owners 
must also go about with them, as farmers 
to whom live-stock serves instead of land." 

7 36 \T)<rrias] It is highly charac 
teristic of the Greek philosopher that 
while he is indignant against trade and 
particularly against lending money on 
interest, 9 9 ff., 10 4, 5, he includes 
piracy as one species of the chase amongst 
the direct natural modes of acquisition 
or production, and therefore as appro 
priate to a householder. He was led to 
this by the observation that not only do 
certain uncivilized tribes live by plunder, 
and combine with a nomad life a life of 
brigandage, but also amongst the most 
ancient Greeks, as Thuc. I. 5 precisely 
informs us, piracy was rather honourable 
than disgraceful oi /c %OI>TO ? TTW 
TOVTOV TOU epyov (pepovros 5^ n /cat 
fj.d\\ov, cp. Horn. Od. in. 73, IX. 2ej2 : 
and even later it was usual amongst 
the Locrians and other Hellenic peoples 
(Thuc. i. 5, ii. 32, iv. 9. 2). Here he 
has forgotten his own principle, that the 
true nature of a thing must not be sought 
in its beginnings, but in its perfect devel 
opment, 2 8. A strong national preju 
dice is apparent in all this, but it is well 
known that the earlier centuries of the 
Christian era had the same aversion 
to lending on interest (see Introd. 30), 
while many barbarities were allowed with 
out scruple, as for instance the right to 
plunder wrecks, which Schlosser (i. 47 n.) 
adduces as a parallel. See Introd. 27 f. 
SUSEM. (71) 

I. 8. 10] 

1256 a 24 1256 b 13. 


KoL e\rj Kol Trora/ioj)? 97 0d\arTav roiavrrjv Trpoaoi- (III) 
/covcriv, O L 8 air opvidcov 77 Qijpl&v d<ypla)v TO Se 7rXei<TTOv 

39 761/09 TWV dvOpWTTWV CL7TO T^9 7^? fj KOI TWV T] /JLepWV Kdp- 

8 TTWV. ol fjuev ovv /3loL TOCTOVTOL cr^eSoV elaiv, oaot 76 avTO- r> 

(f)VTOi> e%ov(TL rrjv epyaaiav /ecu fj^rj St d\\ayTJ$ teal Ka- 
1256 b TTT/Xe/a? KO/JLL^OVTCIL T rjv Tpotyrjv, vo/jia&LKos yecopyifcos \y- (p. 12) 

(TTpLKOS CtXieVTlKOS 07}pVTLK6$. Ol 6 Kal fJU^VVVTeS K TOV- 

TWV ^Sew? %wcri, irpoa avaTrXripovvTes TOP evSeecrrepov {3iov, fj 

Tvyftdvei eXXe/Trw^ frpos TO avTapK^s elvai^ olov O L /ULGV 

5 vo/JLa^LKov afjia KOI \rjo~TpLKoi>, O L 8e yeatpyLtcov /cal 

9TiKov o/JLoiws Se KOI irepl TOV<> aXXou? w? av ?] 

d^rj, TOVTOV TOV rpoTrov Sidyovcriv. r) JJLGV ovv roiavTri 6 

9 wdTrep KaTa Trjv TrpwT^v <yevecriv 
10 Oelcriv. /cal <ydp KaTa TTJV e 

ov dv SuvijTai avTo avTu> 

ourco? KOL 
yevecriv ra /Aev crvveK- 
ft)? iKdvi^v elvai 
TO yevvijOev, olov 


4i [epyaffiav...b I T-TJV] Schmidt 

1256 b i iropit;ovTcu II 2 Bk. perhaps rightly || yewpyiKos is wanting in F M B , and 
perhaps Spengel is right in transposing it to follow 6-rjpevTiKos \\ 3 TOV evSeeffTepov 
PLOV Bernays, TOV evoeccrTaTov j3iov F II Bk. ; TO evSets TOV (3tov Bas. 3 , TO evdees /caret 
Tbv ftiov Reiske (better) || [$...4 elvai] Schmidt || 8 StSo^eV?? II 2 Bk. || 13 yevo- 
[ 2 Bk. 1 

support: see n. (70) on 3. SUSEM. (72) 
2 o 8e KT\] "Others select out of 
these some which they combine in order to 
pass an agreeable existence, supplying by 
an addition the deficiency in independence 
of a more meagre mode of life " (Cope). 

9 7 crvvavayKd^r] constrain : avv 
intensive as in av/mir\r}povi>. 

10 12 6 <ra O-Kft)XT)KOTOKL q WOTO- 

Ki] Aristotle erroneously believed that 
insects lay no eggs, but produce worms 
or maggots which are then transformed 
through several metamorphoses into the 
perfect insect : see Aubert and Wimmer 
Introd. to the De generationc animal, p. 
14, Meyer Thierkiinde des Ar. p. 201 f. 
What he says of the difference between 
worm and egg serves in particular to ex 
plain this passage. Thus De gener. anim. 
n. i 812, 732 a 25 ff. : one species of 
animals, the viviparous, bring forth young 
like themselves fully developed; others 
bear offspring not yet organized or of 
perfect form, and of these the vertebrates 

i] T&V evv- 

Trepl TO, ire^a 
v ... /cat /cXw- 

See also n, on 

37 roiavTTiv] such as before de 
scribed i.e. suitable for fishing . The 
same use of the pronoun in I. i. 2, and in 
II. 4. 4 Set d TOIOVTOVS (i.e. less friend 
ly ) eZVcu. See Cope on Rhet. i. 5. 6. 

36 38 With this classification of the 
different modes of the chase cp. Plato 
Laws VII. 823 B : TroAXT? 
5pui> (sc. 6r/pa), TroXX?) 5 
v&v, Trd/j.Tro\v 8e xai TO 
dypev/JLaTa, ov ^bvov dripl 
jreiai Kai \rj<r TU)i>...dr}pai. 

7 5- 

39 i][xepcov] cultivated. 

8 40 o<roi y avr6(j>vTov] " derive 
their employment from natural growth." 
Nature is used now for what is primitive 
)( the later development. 

41 Ka.irr)\ela = retail trade; e/j.Tropia = 
wholesale trade, commerce. The former is 
used as a contemptuous term, "huckster 
ing", Plato Laws vni. 849 D, xi. 918 D, 
Soph. 223 D. 

1256 b i r-r\v rpotfniv = subsistence, 




[I. 8. 10 

14 ey^ei rpo^rjv ev avrois ^XP L T ^ ?5 rrjv TOV Kakovfievov yd- (III 
11 \CLKTOS (frvcriv. ware o/Wo)<? Sf)\oi>, on /cal [yevo/jievois] olif}- 7 
TO. re (frvrd TWV ^ttxov evetcev eivai KOI TO, d\\a c3a. 
dvOptoTTCOV %dpiv, rd fJiev rjfjiepa /cal Sid TTJV xpfjaw 
/cal Sid TT)V rpo(f)r)V, Ttov Be dyplwv, el jjurj Trdvra, d\\d 
19 rd ye TrXetcrro- r^9 rpo^rjs /cal dX\7]s ftoyOelas eve/cev, Iva 
12 fcal ecrOrjS /cal d\\a opyava yivrjrai e% avTwv. el ovv TJ 
(frvcris jjurj^ev /jiiJTe areXe? iroiei ^r/re /Jbdr rjv, dvay/caiov 
Tutv dv0pu)7T(0v eveicev avrd Trdvra TreTroi^/cepai rrjv fyvcriV 
23 Sib /cal r] Tro^e/JM/cr) ^ucret /CTT^TL/CTJ TTW? ecrrai (rj yap 6rj- 8 

15 [yevopevois] Gottling, reAetwfletVti Ar. Susem. 1 2 yevo/j.evois F M s IT 2 Bk., 
P 1 (ist hand), aXXws yevo/nevois P 1 (corr. 1 in the margin), yivo/mevois 
( = the facts) Zell (in his ed. of the Ethics n. p. 405 f.), [/cat yevo/j-tvois] Bernays, 
[d-rjXov OTL /cat yevofttvois] Bender || 18 Before Trdvra in II 1 is another rd d XXa (raXXa 
P 1 ), a repetition of the preceding: TTO.V (sic) P 4 (ist hand), rd Trdvra P 4 (corrector) 
|| 20 yevrjTat. M s P 1 || yovv Conring Susem. 2 , which suits the sense but is against 
Aristotle s usage, 701/3? Susem., ovv F II Ar. Bk. Bernays || 23 [<5t6...24 avTrjs] and 
23 KTT1TLK7) (f>v(Ti TToXe/JUKrj also 24 [?} oel...i6 TTo\efJiov /cat Trp&Tov] Schmidt, who trans 
poses the latter to follow 1255 b 39 dypevTiKr]. See Qu. Cr. in. 5 ff. 

tively : see Bonitz Ind. Ar. 838 a 8 ff. 
with the examples 837 b 42 ff. 

11 J 5 -yevop-e vois] " after they are 
born." The crude teleology of ir, 12 
is common to all the Socratics and was 
probably derived from Socrates himself : 
Xen. Mem. I. 4. 5 ff. 

12 23 816 KCU i\ TroXejuKi] KT\] This 
does not directly follow from the fore 
going. Some intermediate thought has 
to be supplied : < it must further be as 
sumed that amongst men themselves the 
less perfect are formed for the service of 
the more perfect >. Cp. also n. (70) on 
3. SUSEM. (74) 

There are at least four ways of taking 
this passage. (i) Vettori Giphanius 
Schneider Bojesen make avTfjs and 77 
both refer to TroXe/j-iK-ij. (2) Lambin, 
Schnitzer, Stahr refer avTrjs to Tro\e/j.iKri, 
rf to 6tjpevTi.K^. This is plainly absurd : for 
if dypevTiK-h can be used against men as 
well as wild animals it is no longer /mtpos 
7roXe/xt/c^s, but at least as extensive as 
vroXe/ut/cT?. (3) Garve, followed by 

Hampke p. 16, refers avTijs to KT^TLKT], 
and T; to OtjpevTiKT]. There are three 
objections to this : (a) It proves too 
much ; for if we deduce the right to make 
war from the right to hunt, why should 
not captives be eaten? a notion which 
Aristotle (?) iv (vn). 2. 15 expressly repu 
diates with abhorrence. (/3) Wars of 

(ra eVatyaa) lay eggs, while the invertebrates 
(ra avai^a.) breed worms. The difference 
between egg and worm is this : if the 
young animal is developed from a part 
and the rest serves as nourishment for it, 
it is an egg: but if the whole of the 
young animal proceeds from the whole of 
what is produced, it is a worm. Also 
Hist, anini. 1.5.3 4^9 b 6 ff . : a perfect 
germ (/c^/xa) is called an egg when one 
part of it serves for the formation and 
another for the nourishment of the young 
animal developed out of it, a worm when 
the whole animal is developed out of the 
whole of the germ by its organization and 
growth : cp. ib. v. 10,. 2 550 b 28 ff. 
e/c 5e r&v cr/cwX^/co;^ OVK e/c fj.^povs TWOS 
yiverai rb <oi>, ucrTrep e/c T&V ywi/, dXX 
b\ov auch erat /cat diapOpov/mevov yiverai. 
rb fyov, and DC gener. anim. ill. 2. 4 
752 a 27 f. oi>x wcrirep oi cr/ccoX^/ces 
5t avTuv (sc. ra yd) Aa/x/3d^et TTJ 
It follows from these explanations that 
what Aristotle asserts in the present 
passage of worms is in reality only true 
of eggs. All that the former receive 
from the parent worm is that capacity for 
perfect self-development which is wanting 
in the egg. Cp. also 10 3 n. (96). 
SUSEM. (73) 

14 TOV Ka\ov/m^vov yd\a.KTos <f)ixnv = 
the natural substance called milk. So TOV 
dt /)os, roD Oefi^ov 0tfcrts air, heat respec 

I. 8. 13] 

1256 b 14 125Gb 28. 


u TT/DO? re rd Orjpia KOI (III) 
dpxecrdai pi} deXova-tv, w? 

pepos avrf)?), y Set 
25 TWV dvOpwirwv oa-oi Tr 

<pvcri Sl/caiov ovra TOVTOV TOV 
13 ev pev ovv eloos KTT)TiKr)s Kara $v<nv T?}? 

ea-Tiv o eel rjroi VTrdp^eiv rj Tropi^euv avrrjv OTTCO? 

26 OVTO. after TOVTOV II 2 Bk. On TOVTOV p 2 gives the gloss TOV OrjpevTiKov, this Orjpev- 
TIKOI> has crept into the text in F M> after TOVTOV TOV [| irp&Tov is added after TroXe- 
MO^ by M B P 1 and P- (corr.), /ecu TrpcSroi/ by F : but, as Schmidt observes, this 

has arisen from < = &/ [| 27 KT^TLK^ after /card Qvviv M s P 1 || TTJS olKovo/MKrjs] TOV 
OIKOVO/J.IKOV Thurot, [/^/oos] Schneider Hampke Thurot: but see Comm. || 28 [ecmV 
...virdpxy] Schmidt || o] Thurot (Revue critique, 1869, p, 84 f.), 5i 6 Schnitzer, -g 
Lambin Reiske, 6 <rt> Zwinger, </ca<?>6 Bernays: in Revue critique, 1872, p. 57 f. 
Thurot considers the sense given by the last three suggestions necessary : d Rassow, 
who transposing d...vTrdpxv to follow oliclas and reading ov for 29 uv has the 
following order ecrrtV ov e<m 6r)<ravpio-(ji,bs . . .7) ol/<ias a 5e? 7]Toi...owus 

defence or to regain liberty can hardly be 
called hunting : the notion of hostility is 
the wider. (7) The clause us (pvaei 5i- 
KOUOV assigns a separate justification for 
the kind of war in question, which is not 
therefore deduced from the chase. It 
depends upon the view of slavery laid 
down in cc. 5, 6. (4) Sepulveda renders: 
quo fit ut opes hello etiam parandi ratio 
a natura quodain modo proficiscatur, mak 
ing TroXe/ztK?) an epithet of KTTJTLKT} and 

branch of war which has a natural justifi 
cation. lie adds : " The 5iaipe<ns then is 


he also refers y to d-rjpevTiK-r]. But 
though this gives excellent sense it in 
volves transposing (pvaei after KT-IJTIK^: 
and there is hardly good evidence- of two 
adjectives in -LKTJ so combined, the one 
as attribute the other as substantive. 1 
SUSEM. Quaest. Crit. ill. p. 6 f. Then 
translate : " hence the natural art of war 
will belong in a sense to the art of acqui 
sition (for the chase is only one branch of 
it)" viz. of natural warfare, and 0r)pev- 
TiK ^y 7> is avToQvTos epyacrla. "It" 
i.e. war "has to be employed not only 
against wild animals but also against all 
such men as, though naturally slaves, 
refuse submission, this species of war 
having a natural justification." 

The^view given above as (3) avTrjs = 
KTr)TiK7)<>, rj = 6T)pevTiKri is supported by 
Jackson, who would extend the parenthe 
sis to Tr6\efji.ov. He translates: natural 
warfare will in a sense be a branch of 
acquisition: for (r) the chase is a mode 
of acquisition, and (2) can be applied 
either against wild animals (in which case 
it is e-npe\rri.Kri proper) or against natural 
slaves, who refuse to obey, that being a 


6-tipevTi.KTJ proper 

From 7 5 it would appear that TTO- 
\/m.iKri is still further divided. So Plato, 
Soph. 222 C, includes XTjcm/o;, dvopa-rro- 
SiaTiKr), and TvpavvLK-rj under the general 
head of TroXe/xt/c^, which is one of the 
two branches of r//u.epo6r)pt.K >j." 

25 cos <J>vcri SIKCUOV] Consult the reff. 
given n. (65) on 7 5. SUSEM. (75) 

13 27 iv p.v ovv KT\] See Exc. 
in. on B. i. p. 210. SUSEM. (75. to) 

28 With the changes proposed by 
Madvig and Rassow (see critical notes) 
translate: "one species of acquisition then 
is a branch of economic science, that 
branch namely whose task it is to collect 
a store of objects necessary for life and 
useful for civil or domestic society, objects 
which ought therefore to be at hand for 
the householder or to be provided to his 
hand by his science (Economic)." Others 
(Lambin, Zwinger, Bernays, Thurot) either 
change 6, or else extract from it the sense 
of since , in so far as , taking &v ecm 
6r)<r. xP r )/ JL dT<>}v = ihe means to a store of 
commodities (or possessions, /cr^/xdrwi ) : a 
rendering not very clear, see 14. SUSEM. 
Jackson, for the most part agreeing 
with Bernays, interprets uv ecrrt Qr\a. XPV 
fjidTwv things capable of being stored 
(here perhaps anticipated by Gottling 
TavTa TO, Ypwuara di/ ecrrt 6tjcr.) ; he 


178 nOAITIKHN A. 8. [I 8. 13 

OrjcravpiO fJib^ XP 7 ] ^drtov Trpbs ^corjv avayKalcov Kal (II 
et9 Koivwviav TToXeco? 77 oiKias. Kal eoiKev o 7 d\7j- 9 
31 Oivbs TT\OVTOS 6K TOVTCov elvau. 77 <ydp Trj<$ TOiavr?]? 
avrdpKeia vrpo? dyaQrjv farjv OVK ciTreipbs e<mv, ooaTrep 

\Gt)V (f)7]0rl TTOirjOraS 

TT\OVTOV ovdev rep/xa Trf^acr/nevoi/ avdpcicri, Ketrat. 

15 Keirat, ydp cocnrep Kal rat9 a XXat? Te%vai$ ovBevydp opyavov 
36 pov ovSejjiids ecm re^vri^ ovre 7r\r)0ei ovre /neyeOei, 6 Se 


Kal rot? 7ro\iTLKols, Kal St rjv alrlav, SfjXov 
9 eo~Ti 8e <yevo<$ dX\o KTTJTIKTJS, r}v fJid\.io~Ta Ka\ovcri, Kal 10 

29 cS^ ecrri] y ZvecrTi Madvig (this I think needed whether we emend with 
Lambin, Zwinger, Bernays or transpose with Rassow) : /xepos ecrrtf y fVecrri 

pto-^os (H/a as, a Set... inrapxy Susem. 2 provisionally || wf] 6V Schmidt || 

rwv Bernays (perhaps rightly) for xpT^drow |] 32 a7a^o)i P 2 - 3 Q S b T b Ar. and P 1 
(ist hand), a-ya9r]v P 1 (corrector 1 ) || 35 /cetrcu omitted by M s , /ce?rat yap oni. by P 1 
(ist hand supplied by p 1 in the margin) |] 37 ot /co^o/zi/cciH /cat 7roXirt/ca)i F, ot/co- 
VOIJLI.K&V [/cat TToXtrt/ca;! ] Schiitz, but see Comm. [| 38 [6 rt...39 5r/\ov] Schmidt |[ 
39 /cat ro?s TroXirLKols Schiitz also proposes to bracket, but see Comm. 

translates "in so far as Economic must 
either find ready to hand, or itself provide 
that there may be found ready to hand, 
necessaries of life and utilities which are 
capable of being stored for the common 
use of state or family." 

30 True wealth is for use : 6 Xws 5e TO 
TrAoi Teu ecrnv iv TO; xprjffOai /uLd\\oi> TJ ev 
ry KeKTTjffOaC /cat yap 77 evtpyeid ecrrt TWV 
TOLOVTWV Kal 77 x/3?yVts TrXouTos Ithet. I. 5. 7. 

14 32 avrdpKia = the amount of such 
property absolutely necessary to secure 
independence of all external aid. 

OVK aimpos] See 9 13, 14. The 
notion of a limit to true wealth recurs in 
Epicurus apud Diog. Laert. X. 144 : 6 
rrjs (pvaews TrXouros Kal wptcrrat /cat euiro- 
piffTos ecrTi, 6 5e TOV Ktvdov So^&v ets aTret- 
pov e/x.7Tt7rret. The earlier political eco 
nomists believed in a possible "glut of 
capital": Mill/ 3 . E. I. 5 3. 

SoXwv] Frag. 13, 71 Bergk. SUSEM. 

15 35 ovSev -ydp KT\] Cp. iv(vil). 
i 5 n (695), i 7 ra fjiev yap e/cros 
^%et Trepas, u&Trep 6pyav6v rt, TTO.V yap TO 
Xpr)<ri/*ov s Tt, uv rrfv VTrepfioXyv 77 jSXd?r- 
Tew avayKcuov rj ^ev 60eXos eft/at avr&v 
rots %xov(nv. SUSEM. (76 to) 

37 dp-ydvwv irXfOos KT\] in other 

words, means and appliances for life, and 
for the life of wellbeing and perfection 
as the end of the household and of the 
state. But cp. Exc. in. SUSEM. (77) 

The definition of wealth as "instru 
ments" (given also 4 2) is commended 
by J. S. Mill Political Economy I. 10 as 
adding distinctness and reality to the 
common view. His definitions are "any 
product both useful and susceptible of 
accumulation" with which comp. i256b 
29 and "all useful or agreeable things 
which possess exchange value." Mill too 
restricts the term to material wealth. 

38 rots olKOvojxois KT\] See again 
Exc. in. p. 211 n. (2). SUSEM. 77 (h) 

c. 9. The other species of KT^TLK-TJ, viz. 
Xprj^a.TLffTLK r], the art of money -making, 
i . Origin of excJiange in the infancy 
of society, 2 6. Origin and use of 
money: 7 n. Distinction between 
natural Kramer/ and this xP r lf J - ario " riK l l 
12 15. Cause of the confiision between 
them; 16 18. 

1 40 rv (xaXuTTa KT\] " which is 
especially called money-making" %/a^a- 
TKTTI/CT) (2) of 8 i n. "and fairly so 
called ; to which is due the opinion that 
wealth and property have no limit." But 
9 4 the first sense seems to recur. 

I 9. 4] 

1256 b 29 1257 a 16. 



257 a 

SiKaiov avro Ka\iv, xprjjAaricmKrjv, $i rjv ovSev So/eel (III) 
Trepas eivai TT\OVTOV Kal Krrja-ews. J]V co? ^lav KCLI rrjv 
avrrjv rfj \%d6icrrj Tro/VXot VO/AL^OVCTI, Sid rrjv yeirvlaaiv 
ari 8 ovre rj avrr) rfj elpr^fjievrj ovre rroppw etcelvrj^. eo-rt S 
r/ JAW (j)vo~i rj S ov (frvaei avrwv, d\\d Si* e/ATreipias 
TWOS /cal re%vr)S yiverai fJudXkov. \d^w^ev Be irepl avrfj? n 
rrjv ap XTJv evrevOev. eKacrrov jap KTr^fJiaro^ Sirrr) rj 
eariv, a^^oTeai Se /ca0* avro fMev a\V 




ol/cela r} 8 OVK ol/cela rov 
re iVoSecri? Kal r) fLLTa/3\r)Ti/cr]. afi- 
Kal <ydp 6 d\\arro- 
avrl ^oyu-tcr/Ltaro? 77 rpoc/)?;? 
rj vTroSrj/uia, aXX ov rr)v oliceiav 
ov yap d\\ayrj$ eveicev yeyovev. rov avrov &e 
X el/ Ka ^ L 7r6 P^ T(3v a\\cov Krrffjiarwv. ecrri yap rj 
/*6ra/3\rjriKr) Trdvrcov, dp^a^hri TO fjiev Trpuirov CK rov 
Kara fyvcnv, ru> rd /Jiev 7r\eio) rd S e\drru> rwv Itcavwv 

41 ourw Bas. 3 in the margin 

1257 a i [17^.. .5 /jLaXXov] Schmidt || 3 eKeivris] KeifJ.&v) T (? -posita William) 
Susetn. 1 2 |j 6 xp^aros F M s and p l in the margin |j 7 nad" 1 auro] after 6/iot ws 
Koraes || 9 vTrodrjais IVPP 1 || 12 [77 uTroSTjjua] Koraes, Scaliger proposed to trans 
pose these words to follow XPW 1 -^ which also occurred to Koraes, but see Comm. 

2 1257 a 6 K((rTOu yap KT\] 
"Compare j5V^/. Eth. ill. 4, 1231 b 38, 
where we find the same classification of 
though the use in exchange is 


KaQ 1 avro olKela 
Ka# auro OVK oiKeia 
Kara crvy.fieB nKOS us aV ei rts 

. The two 

reckoned a species not of r] /ca0 auro 
XPWis, but of rj Kara cri^/Se/S 
classifications are as follows 

End. Eth. 
KO.& 1 auro 
Kara ffVfJ.j3J3r]KOS 

rtjj viro57]/j.aTL 

9 inrdStoas = wearing, ij [ieTapXiiTiKii = 

the use in exchange. The shoe when 
used as an article of exchange preserves 
its proper nature, it is still to be worn by 
somebody ; although as it is not made to 
exchange this use is OVK ot /ce?a. 

3 10 Kal yap... 12 V7r68i]p.a] This 
is true. The question is always how 
much money or food the shoe as such, 
and not the leather used in making it, is 
worth : the labour has to be paid for as 

well as the materials (Gottling). Cp. n. 
on 8 (83) and Introd. 28. SUSEM. (78) 

12 T) viroSTjua] as a shoe. 

4 14 &TTI yap...TrdvTWv] sc. XPV 
<ris. " All things have a use in exchange." 
We now speak of the two values of a 
thing, value in use and value in exchange. 

15 dpap.e vTi TO plv -irpwTOv )( ro 5 
v<TTepoi>, derived in the first instance from 
a natural origin [whatever it may after 
wards become]. 

12 2 

180 nOAITIKIlN A. 9. [I 9. 4 

701)9 dvOputTrovs. fj teal $rj\ov, OTL ovrc ecrn <j)v<ret, rr)<; 12 

rj KanrrjXitcr] baov yap LKCLVOV cwTOt9, avay- 
5 Kalov r)V TrmelcrOai rr)v d\\ayrjv. ev fJizv ovv rrj jrpaorr} 
20 Koivtovia (rovro 8 earlv olrcla) (pavepcv OTL ov&ev eanv epyov 
avrfjs, oXX ^TJ 7rA,eiWo9 rfjs /coivcovlas ovarj^. ot i^\v jap 
Ttttv avrcov eKOivwvovv jrdvrwv, ol Se Ke^wpia-fJievoi 7ro\\a)v 
Tra\iv Kal erepcov # #" &V Kara r9 Se^cret? dvayrcaiov <tfv> 
2 4 TToieiaOai ra? /jueTaSoaeis, KaOcnrep eri 7ro\\d Troiei [/cat] ra)v (p- 1 
g 6 jSapftapiKwv G0voi)V, /card rrjv d\\aryijv. avrd >ydp rd 

olov olvov 7T/30? aLTOv SiSovTes Kal \afjif3dvovTes, /cal 

d\\WV TWV TOIOVTCOV eKCLOTOV. Tj fjil> OVV TOiaVTT) fJL6Ta^\,fJ- 13 

17 [77 Kal... r 9 d\Xa777i ] Schmidt || Qvaei r^s xp7?^ari(rri/c^s] rts rfrvvei 
rtcrrtKTj Schmidt lj 18 xP 7 7A taTtcrTt c ^ s ] /wera/SXTyrt/c^s Bernays || 20 [rouTO...okfa] 
Schmidt || ecrr^] ijv Schmidt || 22 TWV omitted in II 1 and Ar., it is supplied 
by p 1 in the margin || 23 /cat was left out by Camot, [/cat] Koraes || er^puv 
<e5eovTO> Schneider, eTpuv<7)ir6povv> Schmidt, ecrrtpovTO Koraes, <erepot> 
Bernays (on which see Comm.) : Fiilleborn saw that something was lost : e 
<erepot Jiirbpovit Susem. Well don changes erepwv into t8eoi>To |j Koraes added 
r t v |1 24 /cat is wanting in F, [/cat] Susem., /cat <i/0i Schmidt and Bernays (per 
haps rightly) : Busse transposes /cat to precede TroXXa not badly || 25 ff. Michael 
of Ephesus in his comm. on Arist. Ethic, f. 70 a refers to this passage 

17 fj Kal 8TJXov...Ka < m]\iKT]] Barter crerat. 

is sufficient for natural wants, as he goes 22 ol 8 Kex^p- KT VI Bernays thought 

on to show. Money is an artificial means the addition of a word for " lacked " un- 

of facilitating this, not of natural origin necessary, because this idea is implied in 

but only due to custom and convention, /cexwptcr/xefot . If so, as /cexwp. <e?repot> 

see 8 n nn. (82, 83): though when erepwv separated (or divided) one from 

applied within due limits it is not con- this thing, another from that, so nexup. 

trary to nature. The whole explanation TroXXuv should mean separated from 

would have been clearer, Fiilleborn rightly many things . But as Bernays gives 

observes, had Aristotle definitely stated division of possessions i. e. separate 

what he means by trade (/caTnjXi/c^^ property was introduced for many things 


huckstering, retail trade): viz. that it is a he must intend /cexw^tcryLteVot iro\\Q>v to 

buying and exchanging "not for one s stand for living in divided possession of , 

own wants, but in order to sell again". or in respect of, many things : a sense 

As it is, this is left to be inferred from hardly possible in any case and quite in 

die context. SUSEM. (79) conceivable if the participle has a different 

1 8 OCT-OV -yo-P KrX] " For the necessity construction with kripwv. SUSEM. 

of exchange is confined, as we saw, to Postgate would govern TroXXcGf /cat erepuv 

the satisfaction of the exchangers own by CKOIVUVOVV, supposing TTO\\WV to be op- 

wants." Cp. rocraur^s = only so much 13 posed to TTCLVTWV (as Tr\eiffTwv is, II. 5. 27), 

1-2. and understanding ertpwv of the primary 

5 21 dXX* rfST]] but not until the division of the joint-household into two: 

society extended. Since trade is intro- " again when the original household split 

cluced at a later stage it is not natural . into two, each half continued to hold in 

Possibly directed against Plato s primi- common a large part of the stock, viz. all 

tive state, the aXydivrj, vyiys, vwi> TroXts, that the other half left it". 

Rep. II. 371 A D: ayopa 5-r T^/MV /cat 23 KO.T& ras 8erj<ms] Comp. 2 5 n. 

^vufioXov r?7S aXXay^s evena yevrj- (18). SUSEM. (80) 

I. 9. 8] 

1257 a 17 1257 a 37. 


29 TiKr) ovT6 Trapa (frvcriv ovre %pr)/j,aTicmKr)<> ecrnv etSo? ovbev (III) 
7 (et? avcnr\r)pw<Tiv yap rrjs /card cfrvcriv avrapKeias r)v] e /c 
TO.UT77? lyever etcelvrj Kara \6yov. ^evucwrepas yap 
r?/? (BorfOeias r&> eiadyecrOai wv eVSeefc KOI eV- 
wv e7r\e6va,ov, e dvdyfcrjs 77 TOV ^o/ucrynaro? eVo- 
s pio-Orf ^770-49. ov yap V/3d(TTaKTov efcaarov TWV Kara v<jiv 
35 dvayicaiwv $10 Trpo? ra? d\\ayd<; TOLOVTOV TI avveQevro u 
7T/909 a(f)d<> aurou? SiSovai, /col \ajJi(BdviV) o TWV 
avro ov ete r^ ^peiav ev/jLera^elpLcrTov -~ Trpbs TO 

32 yeisofJLeviis Koraes, yivo^vrjs H Bk. || .ej SeeZs] W5et Bernays || 37 Koraes 
conjectured <ou/c> 6V, but see Int. p. 28 ff. and Comm. n. (87) || ^] </xera- 
Ko/jd>fcii> Reiske, certainly right as to the sense, </3acrra>^ei^ Bernays (less good) 

7 31 Kara Xo-yov, as one might have 
inferred. Linclau by agreement . But 
can the words bear this meaning ? The 
proof which follows seems to show that 
this phrase expresses subjectively the same 
thing as 33 e afdyKr/s in objective fashion. 
SUSEM. (81) Similarly IV (vil). 16. 10. 
Bonitz commenting on 989 a 30: "quod 
rationibus ad rem pertinentibus accom- 
modatum est et consentaneum." 

|viK<OTe pas y^P---] "when the supply 
extended to foreign countries." 

8 34 ov -y^P t>pdo-TaKTov KT\] 
Yet money is not by nature, but has its 
origin in mere convention ! Here again 
Aristotle falls into the contradiction no 
ticed in n. (71), seeking the true nature 
of man in violation of his own principle, 
before instead of in the normal develop 
ment of civilization. Hence he ignores 
the fact which on other occasions (Poet. 
4 i6) by no means escapes him, 
that there is no unconditional antithesis 
between nature and art, nature and con 
vention, nature and civilization : that 
innumerable arts institutions and conven 
tions take their origin from man s inmost 
nature in the course of its development. 
It is precisely so with the state, and as 
with the state so with money. That in 
history too the law of a rational necessity 
controls chance is a thought not suffi 
ciently acknowledged in his worke : see 
Poet. 9 2, 10, with my notes, and 
Reinkens op. c. 289 ff., who somewhat ex 
aggerates. Cp. also below on II. 9 12 n. 
(296), 30 n. (339), in. 3. 9 n. (466). 
SUSEM. (82) 

35 816 irpds TCIS dXXa-yds icrX] On 
the origin of money compare Nic. Eth. 
v - 5 10 16 (1133 a 19 ff.): of which 
the substance is as follows, 

All things which are to be exchanged 
must be somehow commensurable: and 
for this purpose money has been intro 
duced, which serves as a sort of medium, 
for it measures all things, e.g. how many 
pairs of shoes are equivalent to a given 
house. The standard or common mea 
sure is in reality demand ; but demand 
is conventionally represented by money 
which gets its name (i/o/xicr^a^ currency) 
because it is not by nature but by conven 
tion (vbfj,<#}, so that it is in our power to 
change and demonetize it (i.e. render it 
no longer current). If we do not require 
a thing now, money is still the guarantee 
of a future exchange, to take place if we 
require the thing at some other time. 
And although the value of money itself 
occasionally changes, yet it tends to be 
more constant than that of any other 
thing. All other commodities should 
therefore have a price set on them, that 
so exchange may always be possible. 
SUSEM. (83) 

36 o TWV \pi\<ri\i.<i)v avro ov] Schneider 
thinks this is not implied by the nature of 
money, since certain tribes use cowries as 
a medium of exchange, and the Ethi 
opians stones with marks engraved upon 
them (\idois eyyey\v/j./j.ti>oi.s Ps-Plato 
Eryx. 400 B). We admit the truth of 
this ; yet only a metallic currency can 
fulfil the proper end of money, and from 
the nature of the case the really civilized 
races have always availed themselves of it. 
Aristotle however has failed to recognise 
this sufficiently : see i r n. (87) and In- 
trod. 29. SUSEM. (84) 

37 xpefav recalls x/r^cn/uwv : a com 
modity useful in itself which adapted its 
use handily to the purposes of daily life. 

182 nOAITIKflN A. 9. [I. 9. 8 

(TiSrjpos teal (ipyvpos KOI el TL TOIOVTOV erepov, TO /nev irpw- (III 

rov avrXw? bpicrOev peyeOei KOI crraOpw, TO e reXevralov 

40 Kal xapa/CT fjpa e7ri{3a\6vTO)v, f iv ajroXvo-rj TT}? ^eTprjcrea)^ 

9 avTOV? 6 yap %apaKTr)p ereOrj TOV TTOCTOV crrj^eLOV. iropi- is 

1257 b o~0evTO<> ovv 77877 vofJiicrfJiaTO^ /c Trjs dvayKaias d\\ayf)<; 

Oarepop eZSo? Tr)<$ ^prjfjbaTLcmKri^ eyeveTo, TO KairrfKLKOV, TO 

fjiev ovv TrpcoTov 7rXc5? tVco? yivo/juevov, eZra 8t e/jLTreipias 

4 97877 Te^ViKOOTepOV, TToOeV KOi TTto? /jLeTaj3a\\6[A6VOV 7T\el(TTOV 

10 TTQirjO ei Kepoo<$. $10 $OKl 77 ^prujLCLTicrTiKr) fjia\i(TTa Trepl TO 
vojiiio-jLia elvai, KOL epyov avTTjs TO ^vvaaOai Oewpf/aai Trodev 
ecrrat 7r\rj0o? [^pTjjuaTWv] TTOL^TIKYJ yap [elvai] TOV TT\OVTOV 
Kal xprjjjbdTwv. KOI yap TOV TT\OVTOV 7rd\\aKi$ Tideacri vo- 16 
9 fjiio~ /juaTOS 7r\fj6o$, Sia TO Trepl TOVT eivai TTJV ^pij/jiaTio TiKrjv 
ll ical TTJV Ka7rr)\LK^v. ore Be T:a\iv A-^o? elvai So/eel TO 
Kal vofjios TravTciTrao-i, (frva-ei, 8 ovSev, OTL 

38 K&V el M 8 II 2 Bk. (perhaps rightly) || 40 eTrijSaXXovrwv M S II 2 Bk. 

1257 b 3 ovv omitted by P 2 3 QS b T b Aid. Bk. and P 4 (ist hand) | 
? Susem. || 7 [xp^drwi ] Giphanius || Troi-rjri.Krji [yap] Schmidt, who transposes 
TTOLTJTIKTIV . . .8 x/n^aTow to follow ro Ka.Trrj\iKriv I yap] 5 Bernays, inserting yap after 
the next following /cat, thus: %p7? y uarwj Troi^rt/o? S 5 elvai rod TT\OVTOV /cat <yap> 
XptjfJ-drwV /cat yap /crX. If so, 9 rr/v xp^arto-ri/c?}! /cat must also be omitted || elvai 
omitted by II 1 || TOV omitted by M a , bracketed by Koraes; oVrws? Susem. || 8 Giphanius 
proposed to omit yap ; Schmidt trans]3oses it to follow 9 5td || TroAXckts after Tideaai 
M 8 ? 1 || 9 5ta TO] 5t6 ? Susem. || 10 Thurot proposes to omit /cat before r^v, /cat 
<eIVat> ? Susem. ; Schiitz rejects /cat r^ /caTr^Xt/c^ (or r^ xp^artcrTt/c^ /cat) || 
ii j/6/iy Lambin, perhaps rightly: yet see Comm. n. (86) 

332 ff. SUSEM. (85) 

9 1257 b i Take e/c rrjs dvayK. dX- 
\ayfy with TropiirdtvTos rather than with 
eytvero, "as soon as a currency was pro- 
vided in consequence of the necessary ex- 
change, there arose the other branch of 
the art of wealth, I mean retail-trade : at 
first no doubt in a rude form, but after- 
wards improved by experience as to the 
quarters from which, and the way in 
which, exchange of commodities" not 
fJLTa(3a\\6/uei>ov < TO v6ju.icrfj.a> , "will 
produce the largest profit ". 

10 8 Kal y^P--- 10 Kair-qXiKiiv] 
This is the error best known as the Mer- 
cantile System : the confusion of money 
with wealth exposed by Adam Smith 
Wealth of Nations B. IV. Cp. Mill Pol. 
Econ. pp. r 4. Even in Rhet. I. 5. 7 
i/o/itcr/xaros Tr\7J0os is only one of many 
elements of wealth. 
11 n VOJAOS iravTaircuri] An allu- 

38 o-CSiipos] "Byzantium is an in- 
stance of the use of iron money: cp. 
Plato Comicus Pels. 3 xaXeTrws &v OIK?)- 
crai/mev iv Byfavrt ots | OTTOV cridapeoiai rots 
vo/Jilffju,a(nv | xpwj/rai. These coins were 
commonly called ot crtSdpeot, cp. Aristoph. 
Clouds 249. e i TL TOIOVTOV ^Tpov] 

Aristotle has in mind some such coinage 
as the Electrum money used at Cyzicus" 
(Ridgeway). Electrum was the material 
of the earliest known coins of Lydia, before 
the time of Croesus, and of the Ionian 
cities: see Gardner Types of Gk. Coins 
p. 4 ff., Head Coinage of Lydia p. n. 

TO" [ikv irpwTOV KT\] This is the old- 
fashioned bar-money, like the iron money 
at Sparta, Pseudo-Plato /. c. tv Aa/ce5at- 
fiovi. ffidvjptt) (Trad/jut) vofjdfrovfft, Cp. Xen. 
De Rep. Laced. 7. 5; Plutarch Lys. 17 
(6/3eXcr/cot, spits), Lye. 9 ; Polybios VI. 
49; and H. Stein On the Spartan iron 
money in Jahrb.f. Philol. LXXXIX. 1864. 

1257 a 38 1257 b 24. 

Sez/o? d 


I 9. 13] 

0fJ,eVG)V re TWV ^pw^vwv ouSez/o? d^iov ov8e %pr)(TLpov TTpo? (Ill) 
ovo ev TWV dvcvyieat&v earl, KOI i/o/uayxaro? TT\OVTWV iro\\d- 
KI? aTTopr](Tei rfjs dvajKaias rpo(f)rj^ icaiTOi arojrov TOLOVTOV 
15 elvai 7r\ovTov ov evTropwv \ifjL<p d7ro\lrai, KaQdirep KOI rov (P. 15) 

M.iSav eicelvov fjbv6o\o<yovai Sid rrjv aTrX^cn Lav rfjs ei)^??? 
12 Travrwv avrcp yivo/j,eva)v TWV TrapaTiOejJihwv ^pvcrcov. $10 17 
&TOVOTLV erepov TI TOV TT\OVTOV Kal rr^v ^p^cmcn^/a;^, opOws 
fyrovvTes. GCTTL yap erepa rj Xprj^aTicmKrj KOI 6 TrXouro? o 
20 Kara fyva-iv, fcal afar) pev OLKOVO/JLIKTJ, r) Se KairrfKiKr)^ 
ri xpTjfidrcov ov Trdvrcos, aXX rj Sid ^pTj/jidrcov /ji- 
. Kal So/eel trepl TO vofjuafjia avrrj elvai TO <ydp 
13 vo^io-fjia o-ro^iov Kal Trepan rrjs d\\ayrjs e crrtV. Kal 
po? S?) euro? o TrXoOro? 6 diro Tavrrjs 

12 ov8e Bk., oure II. || 20 avrrj] 77 ? Schmidt || [/cat aim/. ..24 
Schmidt, who transposes /cat avrr)...^o KTTJCTIS to follow 1257 a 5 juSXXo/ || TJ after 
/x^ corr. 2 of P 2 || 21 ^ P 4 - G - Q (?) L s Aid., T/ S b , f, Rassow || Bernays omits X PV- 
narwv after 5td || 24 5^ Giphanius || ovros omitted by II 1 

sionto the derivation of vo^Lff^a = money, 
currency, from vo/j.os = convention, current 
custom: see n. (83). It may be for the 
same reason that money is more pointedly 
said to be v6{j.os rather than PO/XCJ, con 
ventional , as we should expect. The 
same allusion in Pseudo-Plato Eryxias 
/. c. 5,;z. (85) (Schneider). SUSEM. (86) 

on p.TaTi06[Xvwv KT\] Although Aris- 
totle himself, 12, adopts the opinion 
that this form of wealth is ov8i> 0wret, 
yet here the view is carried much farther 
than he goes in 8, see n. (84). He 
must hold that money, when no longer 
current, loses its value as money, retain 
ing only its value in exchange as this or 
that metal : its only use now is as metal, 
not as coin. SUSEM. (87) 

With this comp. N. E. v. 5 n, e0 
YJIMV fj.era(3a\e ii> KCU iroirjffai. dxp r n a " rov i X 4 
Trdcr^ei nv o$v Kal TOVTO (sc. rb i>6/M<T/JLa) 
rb avTo ov yap del law ditvarac 6 uws 5e 
fiovXerai (j.freiv /j.d\\ov. 

14 Ka^Toi KT\] " And yet it is strange 
that there should be wealth of a kind that 
with abundance of it a man will never 
theless perish of hunger, as the legend 
runs about Midas of yore, when in fulfil 
ment of his insatiate prayer every thing that 
was served up to him turned into gold." 

1 6 M8av] This mythical king of 
Phrygia is said to have captured Silenos 
and restored him to Dionysos, who in 

return for the kind treatment of the pri 
soner allowed him to wish for whatever 
he liked. The fatal boon was subse 
quently withdrawn by the god at Midas 
request, see Ovid Mctatnorph. XI. 90 
145. Aristotle must have had a version 
of the story in which, instead of this hap 
pening, Midas died from hunger and 
thirst. Would the Midas of the legend 
have fared any better in the end, if all his 
food had been converted into drink, or all 
his drink into food ? In the one case he 
would have been starved to death, in the 
other killed by thirst. SUSEM. (88) 

12 17 816 r|TOi)(riv KT\] A possible 
reference to previous writers, see Introd. 
20 it. (i). SUSEM. (88 b) 

19 irepa -\\ XP-] Getting of goods for 
use, xP r l/ UiaTia " riK V (3) of 8 i ;/. 

21 8td x.pT|[j.aT&)v (XTapoXrjs] "by 
exchange of commodities. And this spe 
cies, i.e. r/ KaTrr]\LKr), is thought to deal 
with money, for currency constitutes and 
limits exchange :" i.e. trading begins and 
ends with money, aroixriov, main con 
stituent, seems to mean indispensable 
agent in exchange. Elsewhere called 
guarantee, TTJS ^eXXoi/crT/s dXXay??? oro^ ty- 
s, N. E. 14 : and viraXXayfJia TTJS 
?, representative of demand ib. n. 

13 23 Kal dircipos 8-q] l< In the 
words of the line from Solon, 8 14" 
(Bernays). SUSEM. (89) 

184 nOAITIKHN A. 9. [I 9. 13 

25 wo-Trep ydp rj larpiKTj rov vyiaiveiv et? aireipov ean teal (III) 
e/cdcrrT] rwv re^ywv rov re\ov$ et? aTreipov (on fJbdXicrra yap 
e/ceivo /3ov\ovrai Troielv), r&v Be TT^O? TO TeXo? OVK 6t9 arrei- 
pov (Trepan ydp TO TeXo? nrdcrai^, ovrw KCLL ravrrjs rfjs 
29 XpTjjjiario nK tjs OVK eo~n rov TeXof9 Trepas, TeXo9 Be 6 roiovros 
14 7rXoi)T09 KOI ^prjfjbdrwv Krr]o~i^. rrjs 8 OLKovofjiiKijs [ov XP*1~ 18 
fjLano nKr]<i] eari Trepas ov ydp rovro rijs ol/covofjiiKfjs epyov. 
BLO rrj fj,ev fyaiverat dvayxalov elvai rravros 7r\ovrov Trepan,. 
eTrl Be rtov yivofjbevwv opw<p J ev> (rv^ftalvov rovvavriov 
34 ydp et9 (irreipov av^ovaiv 01 ^p^/JLan^ofjuevoi TO 
15 ainov Be TO avveyyvs avrwv. e7rdX\,drrei ydp rj 

25 As Eucken remarks, we should have expected elcri : but this change would 
be very bold (see 36 and 1258 a i) || 30 TTJS 5 . ..31 tpyov suspected as an inter 
polation Schmidt || ov xpT/^artcrrt/c^ P 2 (corr. 2 ), Reiske first omitted these two 
words (but after 31 OIKOVO/J.LKTJS he inserts o /cal T^S xP 7 ]/ JiaTL(! " ri - K W > i n which case 
Schneider and Gurlitt recommend ravrb instead of rouro); [ov] Bojesen Thurot 
Schiitz, a3 Bernays, ov<ar]s> Schmidt. The case is still undecided || 31 01 ydp 
...... Zpyov once transposed by Schmidt to follow 32 Tracts. This however really 

involves other and perhaps more serious difficulties || 32 /JLV <<pv<rei.> ? Susem. || 
dia<.ri 5e>r^ ^v * * (paiverai Schmidt || 33 o/ocD/xep Sylburg, opco F II Ar. |] 34 
, O.LTIOV * * 5td TO fftiveyyvs avrwv Schmidt 

25 TOV v-yLaiveiv depends on et s direi- Qth chapter, " the unpretending germ 

pov : medicine is without end in respect of from which two thousand years after- 

health; medicine recognises no limits wards grew the science of society ". Cp. 

within which its production of health is further IV (vn). i 5 ;/. (695), n. (700). 

confined. SUSEM. (90) 

27 TO, Trpbs TO rAos = means to the end. 14 30 If ov be changed or omitted, 

28 irepas-.- irdo-ais] "For all arts are take rrjs olxovofJUKTJs as an adjective: so 
limited by their ends." True in cases perhaps 1.39 below, and undoubtedly i 8, 
where, after a certain limit has been 1258 a 17: "but to that branch" of ac- 
passed, the number and amount of the cumulation "which concerns the house- 
means applied do not contribute anything holder there is a limit ". See however 
to the attainment of the end, nay even n. on 8 12, p. 177. 

hinder it. But does it also hold for the 31 roi)TO = to attain this limit, xp^ara 

all-embracing end of human life, the TroietV as Schneider says, rfj [ikv] " in one 

happiness and perfection not of indi- sense", viz. when regarded as an instru- 

viduals but of whole nations and finally ment. Lambin Schiitz Bernays take it as 

of the human race? Aristotle did not " to the one branch", viz. that which con- 

think of that : and no wonder, when cerns the householder. 

we consider it is only the discovery of 34 els dimpov] Cp. [Xen.] De Vecti- 

modern Political Economy, that capital gal, 4 6, 7 : apyvpcov 8 ovdeis TTW ourw 

is simply accumulated labour : that the TTO\I> e/cr^o-aro ware /mrj ZTL Trpovdeladcu. 

means to continued progress in national 01 \pi][jLaTi,ofJ.Voi = those who are en- 

civilization are guaranteed solely by the gaged in traffic. 

transmission and growth of the national 35 TO o-vveyY^S, the close relationship 

wealth from generation to generation, between the two branches of XPW -- 

which money first made possible. We rtcrri/c^ is the cause of this mistake. 

ought rather, with Stahr and others 15 eiraXXdrTei] See on I. 6. 3. 

(Introd. p. 28), to recognise Aristotle s "The practical application of the two 

penetrating insight, the ripeness and ma- kinds of xp r il lJ - aTl(rTlK ^ overlaps, through 

turity of many of his conclusions in this being concerned with the same article. 

I. 9. 16] 

1257 b 25 1258 a 5. 


auTr/5 (HI) 

TOU avTov oucra } e/caTepas Tr)< 

ecrTi KTijcrews xprjcris, aXX ov Kara TCIVTOV, aXXa Trj 
erepov* TeXo?, T^? 8 77 avfrjan<s. wcrTe So/cec TLCTL TOUT 
39 TT;? ol/covo/jLiKijs epyov, KOL SiaTe\ovcriv rj crw^eiv 
!6 Set^ ^7 aveiv Trjv TOV vo/nicr/naTO^ ovalav et? ajreipov. CILTIOV 19 
oe TavTtjs T^? oiaueo ecos TO crTrovoa^eiv Trepl TO 

1258 a yLtry TO U ^7^ fc<? CLTTGipOV OVV 6KC11WJS 1 

KOI TCOV TTOLrjTiicwv direlpcov 7ri0v/jLovcn,v. OCTOL $e 
^fjv eTTiftaXXovTai, TO 777305 T5 a7roXau<T6t5 r 
%7]Tovcriv, (oaT eTrel Kol TOUT ez^ TT? KTijo-ei 
5 %etz^, Tracra 77 SiaTpiftrj irepl TOV ^prj/jLaTKr/jiov GCTTL, teal TO (P. 16) 

TOU ev 

36 Ka.Ttpa.s Ar. and the mss. used by Sepulveda, eKarepa F II Bk. eKarfyq. 
Schneider, eKar^pg, and then 7-77 xpy/j.a.Tio TiK f) Bernays, perhaps rightly || 37 /CTT;- 
(Tews xpy ffl -s Gbttling (after Schneider, or rather Fulleborn, had proposed to omit the 
whole clause 36 rrjs 7^/3. ..37 xPW -^j XP r n (Teus KTrjais FIT Ar. Bk. || 39 oiKovo/j.ias 

p4.6. Q Sb T b 

1258 a i oixrrjs] iovays Sylburg (but see on 1257 b 2 5) I! 2 o^ 01 ...... 3 eTrifBaX- 

Xovrai noticed by Eustath. on the Iliad p. 625, 36 || 4 vTrdpxov Koraes (perhaps 

Here two x/njVets eTraXXarroim because 
they have the same object in common ". 

37 TT]9 p.^v KrX] The one application 
has a different end (viz. enjoyment, use) 
the other aims at mere accumulation . 

39 SiareXoiicriv KrX] " persist through 
life in the opinion that they ought at 
least to hoard their stock of money if not 
to go on adding to it indefinitely " : i>o/u <r. 
ovalai> = their substance or capital in 
money, Bonitz s. v. Better thus taken 
than as a paraphrase of vo/j.i<r/j.a, for 
which idiom see Waitz Org. I. 283 and 
cp. i) TOV 6pi>idos ovaia 693 b 6. 

16 This gives the reason why men 
fall into the error just noticed, the ex 
ternal cause, the trap into which they 
fall, having been stated in 14 : rain-rjs 
rfjs ia0&rea>s = rou SiareXe?^ TJ o-yfeiv KT\. 

40 alViov 8 KrX] Perhaps the 
thought becomes clearer says Fulleborn 
when expressed as follows : men have a 
universal desire for long life, and without 
setting a definite aim before them, with 
out making clear to themselves wherein 
the value and happiness of life really con 
sist, they work on incessantly to procure 
themselves the means of living through 
this indefinite series of years. Now if 
they would consider how to provide for 
present enjoyment and for the ennobling 

of life, their desire for gain would be 
rendered more definite and limited . 
SUSEM. (91) 

1258 a 2 6 <roi Si KT\] "those who set 
their hearts upon a life of happiness look 
for it in sensual enjoyments": whereas 
on Aristotle s own theory, the true em 
bellishment and perfecting of life, i. c 
happiness, consists in the utmost possible 
cultivation of mental and moral excellence 
of which the highest and noblest enjoy 
ments are but a necessary consequence, a 
moderate share of external goods and 
bodily pleasures being required not as 
constituent element but merely as indis 
pensable condition : all beyond this hin 
ders rather than promotes true Wellbeing. 
See Zeller Phil. d. Gr. n ii 609 : cp. iv 
(vn). i 7, 8. SUSEM. (92) 

3 iri|3ciXXovTai,] throw themselves 
upon (cp. Horn. //. VI. 68, evapuv CTTL- 
j3aX\6/jivos) desire in the same meta 
phorical sense as opeyecrdai, dpT^%ecr#at. 
But otherwise n. i. r to adopt . For 
the intransitive use of the active see I. 13 
8, 13. InA T ic. Eth. i. 5 i, 2 6 awo- 
\ava-TLKbs /3os is the life of sensual enjoy- 
meHt". As Plato explains Rep. ix. 580 
E f\V money is the means to this life, so 
that (f)i\oKep5s, 0tAoxp?7/mToi are con 
vertible terms with TO eTridv/u.-rjTiKoi : hence 
6 xP r lf JLaTLa " riK s &vr)p comes to be com 
pared with 6 0iX6ri/uos and d <pi\6(ro<pos. 




[I. 9. 16 

17 eTepov eZSo9 7-779 

/3o\fj yap 01/0-779 7-779 
i>Trep/3o\ri$ Tro^TLfcr/v 
#779 BvvcovTai Tropi^eiv, 
10 eKacrrr) ^pw^evot, TWV 

Sid TOVT e\r]\vOev. ev VTrep- (III 
rrjv Trjs 

/cdv pr) Sia 7-779 
8t d\\<rj$ alrias TOVTO Treipwvrat,, 
Svvd^ewv ov Kara (frvcriv. dvSplas 20 

yap ov %pr}/j,aTa iroielv ecrnv d\\d ddpao^, ovSe 
18 Kdi larpiKrjs, d\\d 7-779 /Jiev vihcriv 7-779 vyleiav. 01 Be 
Trdaas TTOLOVCTI, xprj/jLaTio-Ti/cds, 0^9 TOVTO reXo9 ov, Trpos Ss 
TO reX,o9 aTravra Seov CLTTCLVTCLV. 

Trep jjiev ovv T7;9 re fjirj vay/caias ^p7j/^aTL(7TLK7^, KOI r9, 

1 6 teal SL air lap riva ev XP ^ ^ cr / ji ^ l> avrfjs, eiprjrai, KOI Trepl 

T?;9 dvay/caia?, on erepa ^ev avrijs olKOVopiKr) Se /card (pvcriv 

TI Trepl rrjv rpo^tjv, ov% waTrep avrrj aTreipos d\\d e%ovcra 

10 opov &rj\ov Se teal TO aTropov^evov eg p%^9, TTOTepov TOV 21 

12 vydav M a P 1 || 15 [r^s re /XTJ dvayKaias] Schmidt || /HTJ is transposed by 
Hampke and Rassow to precede 17 avayKaias but wrongly || 16 [/cat Trepl. ..ig 
opov] Schmidt || 17 </ccu>/cara 0i5o-^ Thurot || 18 y Schneider (perhaps 
rightly, unless we prefer to omit TJ ...... rpo^v] \\ aur-rj Welldon || 19 Bender 

considers the whole of c. 10 drj\ov...b 8 early to be spurious; but see Comm. n, (9,-) 
|| Schmidt transposes 19 ^rj\ov...^> ty^v to follow 1256 b 30 ot /aas 

carry on such pursuits merely to gain a 
living by them? (Glaser). It is true 
that if there were no stock exchange 
there could be no speculation in stocks, 
and then no one would be tempted to 
such excessive indulgence in it as is cer- 
tainly liable at times to endanger the 
morality of whole nations [as e.g. at the 
time of the South Sea Bubble]. But^. 
without the shadowjio light ; civilization 
is itrlp^gSrbfe^^out luxuryT In spite 
ofmany great evils "\vtrrdr- money has 
brought into the world it is to this inven- 
tion alone that we owe the fact that nine- 
tenths of mankind are now no longer 
forced to serve that fortunate minority, 
the owners of real property. Think of the 
time when money was still scarce in 
Europe; the land then belonged almost 
exclusively to the clergy and the no- 
bility. Money alone introduced a new 
species of commodity of inexhaustible 
ownership, which stands open to all to 
acquire (Schlosser). " Aristotle forgets, 
too, that, even before money was in- 
vented, people might find no limit to 
wealth-seeking. The fa?) daireros of 
Odysseus, Od. xiv. 96, went beyond the 
limit of his consumption, and its aim was, 
not nurture, but power, as he could make 

17 8 Kav [t.^ KT\] "And if they 
cannot procure this " (airoXavffTLKriu virep- 
po\r)v) "by mere accumulation they at- 
tempt it by some other supposed cause, 
perverting each of their faculties to at- 
tain it." 

18 13 irao-as iroiov<ri xpt][xaTur.] 
Compare Plato Rep. I 342 D : the true 
t arpos no xp r J/ J - aTia " 7 "fl^j an d 34^ C, D: 77 
/u,i<r6uTi.Krj accompanies the other arts to 
provide ^remuneration. 

14 d-iravrdv = meet in, conspire, tend 
to : referrc ad. 

19 opov = standard, limit. Properly 
boundary , definition , like opur/mos. 

16 18 In the several points Ari- 
stotle is quite right, but in reality all this 
makes against him. For it shows that 
the fault lies with the men and not with 
the arts . If men misuse not medicine 
merely, but moral virtues like courage, as 
a means to their own avarice and craving 
for pleasure ; if they can follow agricul- 
ture, cattle-rearing, etc. in the same 
spirit; why are commerce trade and 
banking to be unceremoniously rejected 
merely because they can serve such men 
as a still readier and more successful 
means to the satisfaction of their desires? 
Why should it be culpable in any one to 

I 10. 1] 

1258 a 6 1258 a 23. 


] 77 OV, <d\\d * *> (III) 


d\\d Set rovro jjiev vjrdp^eiv (wcnrep jdp KCU dvOpwTrovs ov 
77 7roXm/<;>7, d\\d \a/3ovaa Trapd r^? (frvaecos xprjrai, 
, OVTCO KOL rpotyrjv rr)v (frvcriv Set irapaSovvai <yr)v 77 

2O [/cat TroXm/cou] Schmidt || oil, x\Xa erlpov. ov yap O.VTOV ecrrt TTOLVTO. TO. 
dvayKcua xP^f J - aTa iroieiv> or something similar ? Susem. (see Comm.), ou * 
Schmidt. Conring and Schneider suspected some loss [| 21 TOVTO] TO.VTO. (a 
conjecture retracted by Schneider) Schmidt Bender ; if taken here, it must be 
repeated in 35, and so Bender || 23 < els > rpofity ? Schneider, rplxpov Oncken, but 

grants to his comitatus out of his herds 
and flocks " (Lang). And is not the total 
result attained in itself truly surprising, 
namely, that the landowner who sells just 
enough produce to defray all his other 
household requirements is the sole house 
holder (olKovb[jLos) ; whereas the merchant, 
the tradesman and the banker are not? 
Not unnaturally Plato and Aristotle look 
ed only at the dark side of trade. Like 
true Greeks (Tntrod. pp. 22, 29 f.) their 
standpoint was still that of the fortunate 
minority supported by the remaining 
nine-tenths who serve : as is seen in their 
approval of slavery and their scheme of 
a body of citizens living a life of free 
leisure, without work, finding exclusive 
unpaid occupation in science, aesthetic 
enjoyment, and civil administration. Phy 
sical labour in Greece was for the most 
Eart converted by slavery into slave- 
ibour. Thus all respect for it was lost : 
"when agriculture, trade, and work in 
factories or on board ships, were given 
up to serfs and slaves, the contempt for 
these occupations was made permanent, 
just because men saw them carried on by 
such people, as conversely they had ori 
ginally been given up to serfs and slaves 
because they were thought unworthy for 
free citizens to follow" (Schiller). Even 
Plato and Aristotle thoroughly despised 
physical labour as something servile and, 
in the bad sense of the word, mechanical 
(banausic), as intellectually and morally 
degrading : see c. 1 1 6 with the pas 
sages quoted in n. (103). Consequently, 
trade and commerce, even the pursuit 
of agriculture proper see iv (vn). 9 
3) 75 10 9 14, Exc. in on Bk. I, 
and Plato Laws vn. 806 D f. all paid 
labour, see n. (102), appeared to them 
more or less unworthy of true freemen. 
It is a further consequence that, though 
Aristotle forcibly rejects the extreme de 

velopments of Plato s social and political 
theories, yet after all he is taking the 
same line with more prudence and re 
serve. See Introd. p. 21 nn. (i) and (3), 
p. 33 n. (7). SUSEM. (93) 

c. 10 Decision of tJic question raised 
in c. 8 i : i 3. Usury the viost 
unnatural form of gain, 4, 5. 

1 19 8ri\ov 8^ KT\] " But it will 
now be easy to decide the further question 
started at the outset, namely, whether 
the art of wealth is the concern of the 
householder and statesman or not, but" 
...Then comes a lacuna which may tenta 
tively be filled as follows : " but, <so far 
as in general needed for the management 
of a household, is the concern of a subor 
dinate science. Plainly the latter is the 
case, and the former only so far as the 
head of the house has to see that the art 
of acquiring wealth is practised, without 
exercising it himself; for it is his function, 
as we said, to use and not to acquire. 
Furthermore it is an auxiliary science for 
procuring instruments for living and not 
the mere materials : these > must be 
given already." But the briefer and 
somewhat different restoration given in 
the critical notes is also admissible: "but 
<of some one else. For it is not his 
business to procure all that is necessary 
for living :> nay there must be definite 
materials found him beforehand." SU 
SEM. (94) 

23 OVTCO K<xl rpocjxi^v KT\] " so nature 
must provide land or sea or something 
else as means of support." Lambin and 
Gottling make yr/v T) daXaTrav epexegetic 
of TTJV (pvcnv and Jackson shows that this 
is not impossible by citing Plato Laius 
891 C, rrfv <pvaiv 6i>o/md^et.v ravra avrd, sc. 
irvp Kal v8wp /cat 7771 /ecu dtpa. But the 
above rendering best agrees with 8 9, 

12, 10 3. 



[I. 10. 1 

24 OdXaTTav r) d\\o rt), e/c 8e TOVTWV, co9 Set ravra SiaBel- (III 
2 vai TrpocrrJKet TOV oiKOVOfJiov. ov ^ a p Trjs v<^aVTiKr]<$ kpia 
d\\,d ^prjaao-Oai avTols, Kal <yvwvai Be TO TTOIOV 
ical eTTiTrjo eiov rj <fcav\ov /ecu dveTnrr/Seiov. teal <ydp 22 

av 7-^9, Sid TI r} uev xprjuaTKTTLKrj uopiov rrjs 
29 oiKovofJiias, r] $ larpi/crj ov /Jiopiov tcairoL Set vyiaiveiv TOU? 
3 Kara TTJV oitciav waTrep tyjv rj d\\o TL TWV dvayKaiwv. eVet 
Se GCTTL aei> W9 TOV oiKovo/jiov Kal TOV dp^ovTO^ Kal Trepl 
vryieias ISelv, ecrrt Se w? ov, d\\d TOV laTpov, OVTW Kal Trepl 
TO)V rjidTcov ecrTi /Jiev w? TOV olKovo/jiov, eo~Ti Se w? ov, d\\d 

35 ()vcrei TOVTO 

24 raura] avrriv Glaser (wrongly), -jravra ? Oncken, raXXa Bender (both better, 
but hardly correct) H 25 ov\ ou5e ? Schmidt || 29 Set after vyiaiveiv M s P 1 , 5e?j/ P 4 \\ 
32 vyieias Aid. vyeias M 8 P 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - || TOV larpov] TTJS larpiKrjS P 6 Q L 8 and P 4 (ist 
hand yp. TOV laTpov in the margin), while in S b T b V b dXXd ...... OL is omitted \\ 

Ide ii <eo-Tii and 33 olKovb^ov <eo-ru >Welldon || 33 TUI> omitted by P 4<6> Q L s 
I! xPWa-Tw] XP^yttario-Ti/cTjs P 4 and yp. p 1 (in the margin), xp^/zartcrriKou P L s , XPV- 
/xarto-rc/ccD Q || 34 After TTJS P 4 - 6 - C c Q L s Ar. (probably also M b U b ) insert ictpdovs 
|| 35 TavTa Bender for TOVTO, cp. n. on 1. 21 

fJid\io~Ta Se, KaOdirep elprjTai rrpoTepov, Set 
<ydp eo~Ti,v epyov Tpocf)r]i> rcG 

24 IK 8 roiJTcav] afterwards, postea 
(Bonitz) : answering TOVTO jxev. "And 
then it is the householder s duty to dis 
pose of these materials to the best advan 
tage (cus Set)." 

2 25 ov-ydpKT\] From this illustra 
tion it would be inferred that the domestic 
branch of xPV/ J - aTi " rLK ^ is related to 
otKovofJUKr) as shuttle-making to weaving, 
and not as the production of wool to 
weaving. Thus the question proposed 
8 i and not expressly taken up after 
wards would have to be decided as 
follows : the domestic branch of xp^/xa- 
TiffTLK-ij provides the household with the 
needful raw materials for use, by artificial 
appropriation of nature s stores, so far as 
nature herself, whose especial function 
this is, has made no direct provision. On 
the other hand the sum total of the neces 
saries of life are certainly called elsewhere, 
8 15, 4 i 4, the instruments (opyava) 
for living or managing a household. As 
however this is not a mode of production 
but a practical, utilizing activity of con 
sumers (6 de fitos Trpd^is, ov irolyans), the 
two answers to a certain degree coincide : 
so far, the question which remains unan 
swered need not have been proposed. But 
there is a difference, again, between earn 
ing a livelihood directly and indirectly 

procuring the appliances and tools re 
quired for it. The latter is undoubtedly 
the business of domestic xP r lf JLaTia " r <- Kr l> 
and therefore it stands to Economic in the 
relation of a subsidiary art that provides, 
not simply materials, but also instru 
ments. Not only is c. 10 required as an 
indispensable conclusion to the entire dis 
cussion begun at c. 8, but even beyond 
that there is much that we look for in 
vain in it ; whether Aristotle himself left 
it thus incomplete, or, as is not quite 
impossible though indemonstrable, we 
have here the inadequate execution of 
another hand substituted for a discussion 
that has been lost or was never really 
written. In the latter case there must 
have been a lacuna here. SUSEM. (95) 

28 airoprforeitv av] xP r n/ J - aTi(rriK V (3) is 
just as much, or as little, a part of Poli 
tics or Economic as Medicine is, and no 
more. For health is just as necessary to 
the state as property, and yet the duty of 
providing health is not considered to 
belong to Politics or Economic. 

3 34 nctXio-Ta] if possible, this 
must be found by nature, i.e. without the 
trouble of acquiring it. 

35 <j>vo-<os -yap KT\] It was explained 
in n. (73) on 8 ri that on Aristotle s 
own theory it is impossible to see how far 

I 10. 5] 

1258 a 24 1258 b 5. 


<yevvr)6evTi 7rape%i,v Travrl ydp> e ov yiveTai, rpocfrr) TO (III) 
4 \ei7r6^evov eariv. Sio Kara fyvGiv ecrrlv ?; ^pi^aTicrTiKr] (p. i 7 ) 


Si7r\fj<; 01/0-779 avrr)S, axrTrep eiTrofJiev, KOI rr;? f^ev KaTrrfKi- 23 
40 #779 TJ79 S oltcovofAi/cfjs, teal ravTTjs fJLev dvayicaias /cal eTraivov- 
evrj^, rrjs 8e /jiera/3o\Lfcrj^ ^eyo/jLevrj^ Si/calais (ov yap Kara 
tt XV avr aXXrjXwv ecrriv), evXoycorara /uUcreLTai i] o/3oXo- 
r) Sid TO eV avrov rov vo/jLicrfjiaros elvai rrjv 
5 /cal OVK e<^) (ptrep e7ropia-d/j,e0a. yueraySoX^? jap ejever 
5 o 8e TO/CO? avro Trotet 7r\eov. oOev /cal rovvo/Jia TOUT 

38 <i]> curd Schneider || 39 [KCITF 77X1/07 $...40 ^v~\ Schmidt 
1258 b i yeTa/3X?;Ti/n7s II 2 Bk. and yp. p 1 (in margin); [/xeTa/SoXt/c^s] now, perhaps 
rightly, /meTa(3\rjTiKT)s </ccu> formerly, Schmidt || 3 CTT Jackson, UTT Bk. 2 , COT 
ceteri || TTJV omitted by M s , [T^] Jackson (unnecessary) || KTTJcnv, <eirl T&KOJ 
Xpw/x<ffotJ> now, <eirl T. -^pw^v-ri aury> formerly, Schmidt || 4 ajTre 
oTrep eiropiffdri II 2 Bk., yirep eiropiffOrj Schmidt || 5 auTo] O.VTOV F Ar. 

this is intended to apply to the animals 
which according to him are produced 
from worms. SUSEM. (96) 

36 iravTl-yap KT\] " for every animal 
has for its sustenance the remainder of the 
matter out of which it grows." Hence 
the animal and vegetable world is nature s 
reserve for the support of man. 

4 1258 b I Ttjs 81 JJLTapo\lKT]Sv{/- 

yo[JLe vT]s] Attested in equallygeneral terms 
by Plato Laws XI. 918 D : compare 
Andoc. I. 137, Diog. Laert. I. 104. An 
Athenian would find capital for mercan 
tile concerns, but he considered it on the 
whole^ disreputable to engage in them 
personally (Becker Char . il. 134 ed. 2, 
Eng. Tr. p. 281). SUSKM. (97) 

2 air <xXXt]X.(ov] If neuter, the profit 
made from mutual exchange. But more 
likely masculine, derived from men de 
frauding and overreaching one another; 
the root, probably, of Aristotle s objection 
to trade altogether. 

p.i<riT<u] Demosth. xxxvil Adv. Pan- 
tacndiim 52 : ^tucroucn, (prjaiv, A^vcuot 
rot)s avdovTO.s. SUSEM. (97 b) 

r\ 6[3oXooTaTiKii = obol weighing, petty 
usury; Lysias adv. Thcomn. I. 18 p. 1 1 7 
explaining the law TO apyvpiov ardffi.iJ.ov 
elvai e0 oVocry av (3ov\r)Tai 6 daveifav 
says TO (fTa.ffLfj.ov TOVTO &TIV ov v*y< dXXa TO KOV TT p drreff at OTTOCTOV 
o.v jSouXTjrat. Cp. also Aristoph. Clouds 
1146, Antiph. Neot. frag, r, Meineke 92 
in Athen. I. 108 E (Cope). The insecu 
rity of the principal lent was the main 

cause of a high rate of interest. Thus 
upon bottomry the average rate charged 
was 20 per cent., which would go to 
cover insurance, [Xen.] De Vectigal, in. 
9. On house-rents the return was only 
8A per cent. Partly, too, the absence of 
a paper medium of the nature of bills of 
exchange, drafts, or bank notes, contri 
buted to the same result : BUchsenschUtz 
Besitz und Erwerb pp. 98, 496 ff. 

3 8id TO err avrov KT\] "According 
to the texts both of Bekker and Susemihl 
o/SoXoo-rart/v?) is hated because it draws a 
profit from coin instead of from commo- 
dities exchanged by means of coin. But 
the explanatory sentence ^Taj3o\TJs yap 
eyefero ^dpii , o 8e TOKOS CLVTO Trotc? TT\^OV 
seems to show that o/^oXoo-Tari/c?) is 
hated because it seeks to accumulate coin 
instead of using it in the furtherance of 
exchange. In order to reconcile the 
explanatory sentence and the sentence 
explained, read in the latter eir instead 
of aTr or iV, omit TTJV with M 8 , and restore 
Bekker s oirep. In this way we obtain 
an appropriate sense : d/SoXocrTcm/c?) is 
hated because it is directed to the acqui 
sition of coin, instead of to the end with 
a view to which coin was invented : for it 
was to further exchange that coin was in 
troduced, while interest multiplies coin 
itself" (Jackson). 

5 5 TOKOS] Perhaps from Plato 
Rep. VIII. 555 E, ot 5 5?) xP r lf JLaTi(J " ra eyxv- 
\f/avTes, ovde 5oi<ovi>Tfs TOVTOVS bpav, TUV 
\OLTTUV TOV ctei vTrelKOVTO. e^i^TCS apyvpiov 


nOAITIKIiN A. 10. 

[I. 10. 5 

yap rd TiKTOfieva rot? <yevi>u>(Tiv avrd eariv, 6 Se (III 
TCATO? ylverai vo^iv^a IK vo^io-^aro^. ware teal pd\io-ra Trapd 

(fyvGlV OUTO? TOUV J^pr) [JiaT i<J fJitoV (TTil>. 

11 eVel Se rd irpos Tr\v <yvwcnv ^iwpLKa^ev l/cavus, rdlV 
10 7T/30? rrjv Xprj(TiV Set &ie\0eiv. Trdvra Se rd TOiavra TTJV 
fjiev Oewpiav e\ev6epov e^et, T ^ v ^ fyireiplav dva<yKaiav. 
Se r^9 %pr]fjLaTicrTiKrjs fjbepr] ^pr/ai^a TO Trepl rd KT7Jfj,ara 
elvai, Trola \vo-iTe\eo-raTa KOI TTOV teal TTW?, olov 
14 ILTTTTCOV fCTrjais Trola rt? ^7 fio&v rj Trpofidrayv, ojjioiws Se Kal 
2 TWV \onrwv tytov (Bel ydp epTreipov elvai Trpos d\\7]\d re 
TOVTCOV Tiva \v<TiTe\e(7TaTa ) /cat, Trola ev TTOLOIS 

7 eK is omitted by II 2 Bk. and P 4 (ist hand), perhaps rightly: it is added by P 4 
(corrector) || 10 de] yap P Ar., perhaps rightly |) n eXevOepiov ? Jackson || 12 
5e] drj Lambin, perhaps rightly [| rrjs omitted by II 2 Bk. || KTrj/jLara] KTrjvii 
Be mays 

this surplus stock be sold for money it is 
with no intention of making a profit, but 
only to purchase other necessaries with 
the proceeds. The other species is dis 
tinguished by the intention of making a 
profit, and this exchange with a view to 
gain is xp^cmcrrc/ci} in the naiTower sense 
or trading proper. It is again subdivided 
into two branches: the one includes all 
traffic in commodities whether in ex 
change for other commodities or for 
money, the other is traffic in money 
alone by lending it on interest. Aristotle 
regards this last as wholly detestable : the 
former as less bad, but still bad enough 
(Schlosser). SUSEM. (98) 

c. ii Production viewed on the prac 
tical side. Cp. Analysis $. 100. 

1 10 xpijtriv^ practical application, 
as in 9 15. 

TravTo, 8 KT\] The theory has its 
limitations solely in the nature of the 
case generally ; but in practice the nature 
of the particular locality where we live, 
and therefore the climate, the character 
of the soil, &c, determine whether we are 
chiefly confined to agriculture or to cattle- 
rearing, to mining or commerce by sea, 
whether there can be preserves of fish 
and fishing or not, which sorts of grain or 
of cattle must be procured, and so on 
(Schiitz). SUSEM. (99) 

IT For tXfvdepov }( avayKaiajs, strictly 
limited, cp. Mctaph. I. 2 11 982 b 27 : 
(First Philosophy) /j.6vr] eXevdepa 
wv, and 14 983 a 10, avay- 
Iv ovv Trdffai 

Karov Trarpos eKyo vovs TO KOVS 
TroXXaTrXacrt ous Ko/J.i6/m.i>oi, TroXiV rov Krj- 
ipTJva Kal TTTdJxov e^iroLovai rri TroXct. Still 
earlier in Aristoph. Thesmoph. 846, d^ia 
yovv el TOKOV, reKOvaa TOLOVTOV TOKOV " 
(Ridgeway). Cp. also Plato Rep. VI. 
507 A, Politic. 276 A. 

With 3 8 8id TO KT\ comp. Plato Laivs 
V. 742 C, VIII. 842 B. Every one will agree 
with Fulleborn that this proof is sophis 
tical. But Stahr rightly observes : it 
was not until capital itself attained its 
complete development, that is, only in 
recent times, that the justification and 
reasonable necessity of interest became 
clear. The history of capital recounts 
the gigantic efforts that had to be made, 
the difficulties that had to be surmounted, 
in order to its formation. From the point 
of view of universal history the high rate 
of interest in ancient times has perhaps 
been a favourable means to that end ; yet 
its immediate effect, in conjunction with 
a cruel law of debtor and creditor, was 
to excite repulsion in men with moral 
natures and this led them decisively to 
condemn interest altogether, as Plato 

All this tends to give Aristotle s whole 
theory of exchange the following shape : 
he first includes under the term Ex 
change (dAXcry??) all buying and selling 
barter. Next he subdivides this genus 
into two species, the one good and praise 
worthy, the other not so. The former 
belongs to Economic. It exchanges the 
surplus stock of the household for commo 
dities which the household needs; or if 

I. 11. 4] 

1258 b 6 1258 b 29. 


aXXa <ydp ev aXXat? evOrjvel ^oopai^, elra irepl yewpyias, (IV) 

Kal rauTT/? rjSrj tyL\rj$ re teal TretyvTev/jLewrjs, KOI yueXtr- 

[g rovpyias, KOI rwv d\\o)v ^wcov TWV 7r\a>TO)i> 77 TTTTJVWV, dtp? 

3 OGWV o~TL Tvy^dveiv /3or]Qeias. rr/? fjuev ovv OLKeiordrri^ xpij- 2 

21 fjiaTi(TTiKr)<$ ravTct ^bpia KOI Trpwra, r>;5 Be /xera/SX^Tt/c^? 

jjueyicrrov fMev euTTOpla (Kal Tavrr/s pepr/ rpia, vavK\7]pla 

(fropTrjyia Trapdaraa-^ Bia<pepei, Be TOVTGOV erepa erepwv TM 

rd fjiev do-(f)a\e(TTepa elvai, rd Be TrXe/co TTOpi^ew rrjv eVt- 

l tcapTriav}, Sevrepov Se TO/ctcryLt09, rpirov Be iJuaOapvia (rav- 

26 TT;? S rj jjbev TGOV (Bavavcrwv re^ywv, rj Be roov die^uwv 

Kal TO) a-wfJLCLTi fjbovw xprjarifjiwv) rplrov Be et8o? %prj/Aa- 

THTTiKris /jierafv ravrrj^ Kal T^? Trpcor^^ (e%et yap Kal TTJS 

Kara fyvcnv TL /Ltepo? Kal TTJS /LteraySXT/rt/CT;?), ocra djro 7779 

26 Te-xyijjv] Te-xyirCsv Vermehren, perhaps rightly || 27 rpirov} reraprov II 1 and 
P 4 (corrector), d XXws rpirov p 1 in the margin || 29 6Va] oucra Bernays 

2 17 ev0T]Vi = thrive, have abundant 
offspring : see Verrall Trans, of Camb. 
Phil. Soc. ir. p. 165. 

1 8 q St] and here (when we come to this) 
we find two kinds : agriculture proper and 
fruit-growing. The technical terms per 
haps of Apollodoros, 7. 

The cultivation of the olive and in 
particular of the vine would be included 
under T) ire<pvTevfj,ti>r); see Steitz He.siod s 
Works and Days (Leipzig 1871) p. 27 f. 
SUSEM. (100) 

3 23 <J>opTT)-yux = inland trade. Su- 
SEM. This is the view of the commen 
tators generally, but Cope disputes it. 
He remarks: " (froprrjybs and its deriva 
tives ^oprrjyelv, (poprriyiKos, (popraywyos, 
<t>opTaywye2i>, seem to be a/ways applied 
to commerce carried on by sea, whether 
va.vs or TrAoia be expressed or not (the 
sense of porter given in the lexx. seems 
not necessary in any of the passages, cp. 
Theogn. Frag. 679, Aesch. Frag. Phryg. 
242). For this reason, and because 
commerce by land at Athens and in 
Greece generally was so utterly insigni 
ficant in comparison that it might well be 
passed over without notice, I rather think 
that Aris. means by t>avK\r)pia building 
and letting out ships for traffic, and by 
(poprrjyla commerce proper, the transport 
of goods on board of them, perhaps in 
cluding also land transport. On this 
view Xenophon s distinction De Rep. 
Laced. 7 6 ^kv yeupyet, 6 de vavK\T)pei, 6 
5t efjuropeverai, would correspond to Ar 

istotle s here." 

n-apcta-Tcuris virtually = /caTr^Xt/cTj, sta- 
taria mercatura, hominum nimirum in foro 

24 acr<j>a\e (rT6pa] For definition of 
dff(pd\eia in this connexion, see Rhet. I. 5. 
7 TO evravda. Kal ovrw xeKTrjcrdai w crr e$> 
aury elvai. TTJJ/ xp^crtj avrQiv (Jackson). 

e IT L Kdp-rrLa = profit additional to the 
principal (Tapxalov): see on n. 

[xicrGapvia KT\] Cp. 6 below. 
In any case the division is incomplete. 
The occupations distinguished in 6 as 
rex^KwrciTcu, which are not unskilled 
manual labour nor service for wages, are 
here omitted : see un. (102, 103). More 
over in v(vm). 2. 5, where jj.i.crdapvi.Ka.1 
epyacriai are said to be degrading and 
pdvavaoi, the term has quite a different 
meaning, see n. (981). SUSEM. (101) 

4 26 By drcxvoi Kal ry crcfyicm 
P.OVOV x/aTjcriyuo Cope understands the 
GrJTes in a general division of the popula 
tion ; farm-labourers, porters, etc. 

29 o<ra KT\ is in loose apposition to 
eI5os XPW-1 " all the wealth or property 
derived from land and such of its useful 
products as are employed by the pro 
prietor himself," like the Kapwol of 77 Trefiv- 
Tv/m.vtj yewpyia. Even if Bernays od<ra 
is right, we cannot accept his punctuation 
(a colon after 28 Trpwr^s, no parenthesis, 
but a single sentence from x et to 3 1 
yueraXXeim/c??) or his translation of ov<ra 
airb 7775; directed to the land . SUSEM. 



[I. 11. 4 

8e, (P. .8) 

30 Ka TWV aTTO 7779 yivo/jievcov, xpTrwv yaez> 
5 olov vXoro/jiLa re Kal rraaa /jLTa\\evrtKr}. avrT] e TroXXa 

?} &?7 7re/He/X?7(/>e <yevr) TroXXa <ydp ei$r] rwv etc 7379 yu-eraX- 

\evojneV(Ol> ecrriv. irepl cKacrrov 8r TOVTWV KaGoXou jj,v ci pTjTCU 3 

Kal vvv, TO 8e Kara jx^pos aKpipoXo- 
6 irpos rds ep-yao-ias, <J>opTiKov 8 TO I 
36 Te-^viKwrarai fjiev TWV epryacriwv OTTOV 

/3av aver 6 rar a L & ev 0-69 rd crw^ara Xco/Swi Tou /-caXtcrra, 

Sov\iKccrarai, Be OTTOV rov <7&)u,aro9 7r\elarai 

xP r " l | Jlov K-* v 
et crl Se 

31 v\oTOfj,ia] 97 Xaro/^a Thomas Aquinas and Susem. 1 , but wrongly || 33 Trepl... 

35 fr5ia.Tpl(3eiv Susem. transposes to follow 39 dper^s; so.Qlntrod. p. 78 || 677 Susem., 
de F II Bk., omitted by Ar. |j 35 eiVt...39 dperTjs was first seen by Montecatino to 
be out of place, it was erroneously transposed by Piccart to precede 27 rpLrov 8 || 

36 P 4 - 6 - Q Aid. S b T b Bk. insert r^s before TVXW II 38 ayevforarai MT 1 - 4 - Q Aid., 
perhaps rightly 

30 ctKap-n-wv] Compare Rhct. I. 5. 7: 
xdpTTi/bia 5 Xtyw a(f> &v at Trpbaodoi 

31 iiXoTOfjiia, the growing and cutting 
down of timber as distinct from the fruit- 
trees of 77 TrefivTevfAevr) yeupyia. 

5 32 i yVT], ti Sr) interchanged: cp. 
8 2 erepov etSos with 3 erepov y&os. 

6 36 07TOV IXdxiO-TOV TV)(T]S] 

"where chance has least play": where 
nearly everything turns upon acquaintance 
with the facts, technical knowledge and 
skill; where the skilled craftsman s hand 
is guided by intellectual training, which 
is the all-important element. Cp. Walter 
op. c. 505 f. Clearly Aristotle means what 
we call the fine arts and all the higher 
technical pursuits, including the sciences 
themselves and rhetoric, if followed or 
taught professionally for pay. In parti 
cular the art of the sophists, for which see 
n. (552) on in. 9. 8, also v(vni). 2. 5 
with n. (981). SUSEM. (102) 

Compare Polos, T? fj.v yap 
rkxyW eTTolrjo ei , TJ 5 aTreipia 
Metaph. I. i. 8, 981 a 4 (Jackson). 

37 pavavo-oTdTai crX] This and 
many other passages c. 13 13; ill. 4 
12,5 4, 6; iv(vn). 9 3, 14 7; 
v(vm). 2 5, 6, 4 6, 6 36, 16, 
7 7; vn(vi). 4 n, 12 with notes; 
Plato, Laws v. 741 E, 743 D f., cp. vui. 
831 c f., 846 D f.; Xenoph. Occ. 4 2 f., 
cp. 6 6, 10 10 show clearly how 
closely related were the conceptions of 
the servile (cp. n. 43) and the mechanical 
both to Aristotle and to the Greeks at large 

(see further Herod, n. 167). Servile 
occupations like that of the hired labourer, 
4, form according to this description 
the proper antithesis to those which are 
artistic (n. 102); mechanical trades are 
intermediate, yet even the artizan, to say 
nothing of the labourer, is only a superior 
kind of slave. Aristotle has really be 
fore him the "sedentary" crafts, re^cu 
edpcuai Eiid. EtJi. I. 4. 2, 1250 a 30, 
which are not conducive to bodily health 
or a noble carriage; v(viii). 2. 4 n. (980). 
Similarly we read in Plato Rep. vi. 495 D 
that manual labour disfigures the body 
and mars the soul; Xen. /. c. says that it 
hurts men s bodies by keeping them in 
a sitting posture (KaQ^rdai.) cooped up in 
doors ((r/aar/9a0eur#cu), or in other cases 
standing all day long over the furnace; 
and Pseudo- Plato Erast. 137 B that it 
makes them go about with stooping 
shoulders and backs bent Kvirra^ovTa %r\v 
(the references from Eaton). This is to 
tally unlike the way in which Socrates 
thinks and judges : he speaks as the 
son of a poor craftsman, Plato Xenophon 
and Aristotle like men of rank and pro 
perty , Zeller Phil. d. Gr. n i 142 (Eng. 
tr. Socrates and Socratics p. 170 n. i). 
Compare Xen. Mem. in. c. 10. With 
the definition of servile employments 
compare c. 2 2 n. (6b) and c. 5 7 ff. 
SUSEM. (103) 

For Xcopwvrai see v(vm). 4. i : the 
workmen themselves spoil or deprave 
their bodies ; i.e. render them feeble and 
unfit to do service for the state in war. 

I. 11. 9] 

1258 b 301259 a 15. 


39 ararai Se OTTOV e\,d%i(TTOv TrpocrSei dperrjs. (IV) 

33 < 7Tpl e/cdcrTOV Si} TOVTWV /ca06\ov JJLCV 

34 <KOI vvv, TO Be /card yu-e/oo? a,Kpi[3o\o r yeia 6ai ^pijcriuov /uez> 

7 <ra? epyacrias, (fropntcov Se TO 6vSiaTpl/36iv.> eVet S e er eV/ot? -t 

40 yeypafi/jbeva Trepl TOVTCOV, olov XapyTiSr) rw Tlapiti) teal 
12593 A-TroXXo >&)> &) TGO Aij/jivlq) Trepl ryecopylas Kal i^fX??? #at 

Tre^vTev/jLevrjs, 6/W&>? Se AOU a XXot? Trept a\\wv, ravra fjiev 
IK TOVTWV deajpeiTO) orw eTTt/xeXe? ert Se /cal ra 
4 a7ropd$r]v, Si? wv 7riTeTV%iJKa(Tiv evioi 

8 Set cruXXeyetzA iravra yap w^eXi^a ravr ecrrl rot? 
TT)^ xpTjfjLaTLcmKijv, olov Kal TO BrtXew TOU 
TOUTO fy^ eVri KaTavorjjjia TI %pri fjuaT LCTT LKOV , aXX e/celvq) s 
/Lte^ Sia TT}^ crotyiav TrpocraTTTovo t, Tvy^dveL Se Ka06\ov TL 

9 oz/. 6vei$L%ovT(dv jap avra) Sid TTJV Trevlav a5? 

10 T^9 </>tXoa-o(/Ha? oi/cr?;?, 

ecrofAevrjv CK rr;? 

ert %eiua)vos 

/cat Xt&) TrdvTwv, o\lyov 
eVetS?) S o Kaipb? 

TO)V r e 
/Aia -Owa-dfjievov CLT ovSevos 
15 77 /ce, 

40 x.o.ptjTi. (x^P Tt M 8 ) 5^ II Ar. Bk. Bernays 

1259 a 6 olov ...... 18 o-irovSd^ovcriv seems to have been used by Hieronymos 

of Rhodes as quoted by Diog. Laert. I. 26 || 13 eXaiovpyeiwv P 1 and Ilieron. 
eXaiovpyuv F Susem. 1 2 *, eXcuovpyw P 4 , t\cuovpyiwi> M 8 Q (?) S b T b , e\aiovpyiwv P - t3 - 
Aid. Bk. Bernays, eXeoup ytwi L 8 

39 Sirou ... dpcriis] "where excel- 
lence" of any kind, and so, where bodily 
excellence " is least needed." No doubt 
lending money on interest is particularly 
he includes 


meant, 10 4. Such business 
under the servile occupations. 

7 40 Trepl TOVTWV] With the 
transposition this aptly refers to 34 r6 
Kara /j.epos a,Kpipo\oyeicr6ai, exact parti- 
culars in detail. 

1259 a i AiroXXoSwpw TW AtHJLvtw] 
Also mentioned by Varro R. R. I. i. 8, 
and several times in Pliny s Natural His- 
tory. SUSEM. (105) 

3 OTCO Imp-eXe s = whoever is interested 
in the subject. We are referred to 
written works in Rhct. i. 4. 13, 1360 a 30. 

8 6 TO dXew] Nic. Eth. vi. 7. 5 
1141 b 3 ff. On Thales see Zeller i. 
168 ff. [ Pre-Socratics i. p. 211 ff.] 


SUSEM. (105 b) 

8 810, TI^V o-o<J>av] Aristoph. Cloiids 
180, Birds 1009. 

Ka06Xov TI] The device (/coravo^/aa) is 
of general application, depending (as ex- 
plained in 12) on the possession of a 
monopoly. See Boeckh p. 52 f. Eng. tr. 

9 12 dppapwvas SuaSovvcu KT\] 
" paid deposits in advance to engage the 
various oil-presses": dpp. = earnest money, 
as guarantee for the execution of the con- 
tract: 3 taS. because the sums were distri- 
buted, paid to various owners. Quite 
apart from the external authority for Acu- 
ovpyelwv (Hieronymos), it seems more 
business-like to engage the oil-mills, six 
months beforehand, than the workmen. 

13 6\iyov] "taking them at a 
low rental, because there was no one to 
outbid him": e7ri/3o,XXei> = add, make a 
higher bid, run up the price. 




[I. 11. 9 

ov TpoTrov TJ/BovXero, 7roXX ^pTJfjiara crvXXe^avTa eTTiBelljai, (IV) 
OTL paSiov ecrTi Tr\ovTelv Tot? (friXocrcxjiois, dv /3ov\wvTai, aXX 
10 ov TOUT earl Trepl o o-jrov^d^ovo-iv. a\rj$ jjuev ovv \eyeTat TOVTOV c 

rov TpoTrov eirlBeifyv 7roirj(7acr0ai T?;? ao^ia^ eorTi S , wcnrep 
20 eiTTo/jiev, /ca06\ov TO TOLOVTOV y^prnjuaTivTitcbv, edv Tt? SvvTjTai, 
fjLovo7ra)\lav CLVTO) /carao-Keva^ew. Sto KOI TWV 7r6\ecov eviai ( P . i 9 ; 


11 7rw\iav yap TWV utvlcov TTOIOVO-LV. ev Sfc/^eXta $e Ti? TeOevTos 7 

Trap* avTO) vo/jLiajLiaTos crvveirpiaTO Tcavra TOV cri$7]pov K 
25 TWV criSrjpeltov, ^Ta Se TavTa o5? CL^IKOVTO K TWV I^TTO- 
picov ol e/Jbiropoi, eVcoXet yiioz o?, ov 7ro\\r)v Troirjcras V7rep{3o- 
\r)v T^? Tigris d\\ oyu-o)? eVl Tot? TrevTrjKovTa Ta\dvTOi<$ 
12 e7re\a/3ev etcaTov. TOVTOV JJLGV ovv o kiovvcrios alaOofAevos Ta 8 
%pr/{jiaTa eKe\evaev e/cKOfjiiaao-dat, yu,?} fJbivTOL ye eVt 

30 fAeveiv ev ^vpafcovcrais, co? Tropovs evpicrKovTa Tot? avTov 


opa^a d\eco /cat TOVTO 

yp eavTols eTe^yaaav 

TavTov ecrTiv 
13 /jiovo7ra)\Lav) xprjo-i/jiov 8e yvwpi^eiv TavTa KOI TO?? 

Titcols. TroXXat? yap vroXecrt Sei ^prj/juaTicr/jiov /cal TOLOVTCOV 
35 Tropcov, axiTTep oltcla, ^d\\ov Se. SioTrep Tives /cal TTO\L- 

TevovTat, TCOV 7ro\iTevo/jLeva>v TavTa /ULOVOV. 

12 eTret oe Tpla pep?) T^? olfcovojAt/cf)? tjv, ev fiev Se- V 
rj, Trepl ry? eiprjTai TrpOTepov, ev 8e 7raTpi/cr), TpiTOV oe 

P 4 Aid., ffv\\tavres S b T b || 25 e/jnropiwv P 2 - 3 -, ?ro/)W M s || 
6 omitted by MT 1 || 30 O.VTOV II Bk. || 31 opa/ma] evpijfta 
? Koraes || OdXy /cat royry Susem. 1 - 2 -, 77w/z ^ Jmic William, 
37 fjieprj omitted by II 2 (added by a later hand in S b ) || 38 \irepl 


28 TOVTO S b Bk. 
perhaps rightly 


10 21 Iviai] Selymbria, Byzantium, 

and Lampsakos are instances given by Ps. 
Aristotle Oeconom. II. 18 1348 b 33, 4 4 
1346 b 25, 8 1347 a 32. 

11 27 eirl rots ircvTiiKovTa] " on " 
or "in addition to his capital of fifty 
talents he received a hundred more ": he 
made a profit of xoo talents on his origi- 
nal fifty. The preposition has the same 
force in ro/cot tirtTpiToi Rhet. ill. 10. 7, 
and the analogous fractions. 

12 28 Undoubtedly Dionysios the 
elder who is mentioned III. 15. 16 n. 
SUSEM. (106) 

31 6 pap.a] discovery : cp. Dem. adv. 
Mid. 60 533, 25, ovdeh irwirore TOUT 
eWe TO TrXeo^/cr^a had an eye to this 

advantage (Postgate). Also Plato Phacdr. 
267 A eUov ws Ti^r&t. 

13 35 Sidirep KT\] See Exc. III. 
and Introd. p. 31 n. (i). SUSEM. (106 b) 
Possibly an allusion to Eubulos. 

c. 12 The remaining branches of Eco- 
nomics : the relations of the head of the 
household (1} to his wife, (2) to his children. 

1 37 irl...T|v] c. 3 i, 2. SUSEM. 
(107) Comp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 9 8ib fj.a\\ov 
Trpbs yvvcuKa eort diKatov TJ irpos TKVCL KOI 
KT^CLTO.- TOVTO yap eaTi TO olKovo/uuKov 
diKcuov with Jackson s note, "in Pol. in. 
6 7 however OI KWO/U/C?) as an epithet of 
dpxy is used to include all three rela- 
tions." Justice between man and wife is 
really avuvvfjiov, 3 2. 

1259 a 161259 b 8. 


I. 12. 2] 

yauiKij, * * Kal yap ywaiK&s apyjs.iv Kal reKVWv, GO? e\ev0e- (V) 
4 pwv aev du<f)oiv, ov rov avrov Be rporrov TTJS dp%fj$, 

dppev <j)vaei rov 0rj\eos r/yeaoviKwrepov, el urj rrov o~vve- 

<7Tr)K jrapd fyvo-iv, Kal TO rrpea-fivTepov Kal re\eiov rov veco- 
2 repov Kal dre\ovs. ev uev ovv rat? TroXtrt/cat? apyai^ rat? 2 
5 TrXe/crrat? fjLera(Ba\\ei TO apypv Kal TO apyo^vov (ef tcrou 

ydp eivat, (3ov\erai rrjv (pvaiv Kal Siatyepeiv fjbrj^ev)^ b/u-w? 

Be, oTav TO fjbev dpyri TO Be apyrirai, f^ret Biatyopdv elvai 
Kal \6yois Kal riuals, wo-jrep Kal "Auao-cs elrre 

* * Kal yap Conring; Bernays by altering ap%eti/ into dp/cr^oc, Ar. by 
, ignore the lacuna: <TTI.V ap^iv, a Paris ms. 2042. See the Comm. 

39 ya.[j,iKrj 

1259 b -2 Troy] TTWS II 1 (emended by p 1 ) 

39 -yaiAiKt]**] There is here a consi 
derable lacuna. For the sense some such 
restoration as the following may be pro 
posed : " Economic science has, we saw, 
three branches, treating of (a) the relation 
of master and slave which has been dis 
cussed above, (/3) the paternal and (7) 
the conjugal relation. < Further we saw 
that in general a slave is only a piece of 
property, persons as well as things being 
included under that head ; and it is not 
the acquisition but the use and mainte 
nance of property which is properly a 
part of economic science. This science 
may therefore be divided into (i) the 
guidance and rule of the persons of the 
household, (2) the right use of the pro 
perty. The former includes the treatment 
of the conjugal and paternal relations : 
the relation of master and slave would 
come partly under the one, partly under 
the other. The householder has to care 
for the improvement and excellence of 
all that belongs to the household, and 
hence for the improvement and excellence 
of the property; but property is only a 
means to the end which the household 
seeks to attain, and the living chattel is 
more important than lifeless objects. 
It is therefore the householder s main 
task to direct aright the free members of 
the house. "> In c. 12 the differences in 
this rule as exercised over the different 
free members of the family are paren 
thetically specialized, but in c. 33 the 
leading thought itself is resumed and ex 
plained. Cp. Thurot Etudes p. 14 f., 
Susemihl in Rhein. Mm. XX. pp. 2 1 2 
215 (where however some mistakes need 

correction), BiichsenschUtz op. c. 716. 
SUSEM. (107 b) 

1259 b i iroXiTiKws] like a magistrate 
in a republic, or, more precisely, an ari 
stocracy, Nic. Eth. vni. 10 5, n 4. 
Cp. Zeller II ii 619 n. (i). SUSEM. (108) 

2 4 Iv ptv ovv KT\] Here follows 
a discussion, as to (r) how far the rule of 
the husband over the wife may fitly be 
compared with republican government, 
despite certain differences between them ; 
(2) how far the rule of a father over his 
children may be compared with monar 
chical government. Cp. further I. 5 7 
. (42 b) and 13 9 . (117). SUSEM. 
(109) "In most cases where citi 

zens rule over citizens rulers and subjects 
change places, for they (TO d pxov Kal TO 
apxdfievov nom. to /SouXercu and to frrei) 
tend to be on an equality in nature and 
to differ not at all " : rr^v <pv<riv an ad 
verbial accus. as 11. 2. 6 rrjv (pvffii>j<Tovs t 
iv(vil). r. IP TTOto? Tt? rr)v~<fivi[n v , r p- T 5 
^oj^_ Yet some have 
, as subject of_etVcu v to 

mearTthe spiriFof republican citizenship, 
or the natures of the citizens. 

8 <rxii[Aao-i, outward signs, insignia : 
\o-yois, titles. 

wo-rrep Kai "Ap-ao-is KT\] Herodotos 
tells this story, II. 172. Amasis, who 
had deposed his predecessor Apries 
(Hophra), was at first despised by the 
Egyptians on account of his low birth. 
Whereupon he had a statue of gold 
made out of a foot-bath, in which he and 
his guests had been accustomed to wash 
their feet. When this statue was set up 
the Egyptians paid it due reverence, and 


196 nOAITIKflN A. 12. [I. 12. 2 

3 TOV 7Tpl TOV TToSaVlTTTrjpOS \6yOV TO 8 dppV del 7Tp09 TO 6rj\V (V) 

10 TOVTOV e%ei rov TpoiTOV. rj Se TWV TCKVCOV dp^r) /3aai,\i,Kr) 
TO yap yevvrjaav real /card (f)i\lav dp%ov Ka ^ KO>TCL Trpe- 
<r/3eiav e<TTiv, oTrep ecrrl ft 
pos TOV A/a Trpocrrjyopevo-ev 

Trarr/p dvdpaiv re $eo3z/ re (p. 20) 

15 TOV ftacriXea TOVTCOV dirdvTWV. (fivcrei yap TOV {BaaiXea Sta- 
8e2, TO> yevei 8 elvai TOV avTov onrep ireTrovOe TO 
Trpo? TO vewTepov /cal 6 yevvrjo-as TT/OO? TO Te/cvov. 
13 (fravepbv TOLVVV OTL ir\eiwv r] (nrovBi) T^? OL/covo/jiias 3 

irepl TOI)? dvOpajTrovs r) irepl TT/V TWV d^rv^wv KTijaiv, K.CLI 
20 Trepl TTJV dpeTrjv TOVTCOV TJ Trepl Trjv T^9 KT^aeo)^, ov /ca\ov/Aev 

7T\OVTOV, Kal TCOV \V0epO)V fjid\\OV T) 8oV\0)V. 

2 TrpwTov /uiev ovv Trepl Bov\cav diropijo-eLev dv T^?, iroTepov eaTiv 

dpeTtj Tt9 Bov\ov Trapd TO.? opyavifcds KOL Sia/covi/cds d\\7j TifJii- 

(OTepa TOVTWV, olov atofypoo-vvr] Kal dvopla /cal SifcaLocrvvr) Kal 

25 Ttov d\\a)v TWV TOLOVTCOV e^ecov, ff OVK ecrTiv ovBe/jiia Trapd 

3 T9 (rca/JLaTifcds VTrrjpeala^ (e%et yap aTroplav djjbfyoTepW etre 

yap ecrTiv, TL Siolcrovcri, TWV eXevdepcov J etVe /U-T) eo~Tiv, ovrcov 


15 After a-rravTuv p 2 adds as a gloss drj\ovoTL irartpa elir&v, and this Trare pa elir&v 

has crept into the text of TM 8 || 17 r6] rbv T P 4 S b Ar. before veurepov |] 18 * * 
(pavepov [TOLVVV] ? Schmidt ; see on 1254 a 24 || 26 etre] efrt P 4 S b T b , d TL P 3<(5> 

Aid. || 28 8e] Sr, M 8 ? 1 - 3 - 4 - Q S b T b Aid. and P 2 (corr. 2 ) 

Amasis, calling them together, explained Opwiroi Works and Days 108 (J. G. 

to what vile uses the object of their pre- Schneider). See Steitz op. c. 50 f. 

sent adoration had once been put. Simi- SUSEM. (110 b) 

larly he had risen from the common c. 13 Various degrees of excellence 

people to the throne, and as king he requisite in the different members of the 

demanded their respect, SUSEM. (110) household; i n. The promotion of 

89 del )( /cara f^epos i 2. The hus- this excellence in slaves, 12 14; in 

band holds, as it were, permanent office. women and children, 15, 16. 

11 Kard <j>.] by right of affection. Cp. Analys. p. 101, Introd. p. 31. 

12 oirep ecrrl KT\] = and this gives a 1 18 TOVVV traducendo ad novam 
form of monarchy, viz. hereditary monar- cogitationem inservit Eonitz Ind. Ar. 
chy,_ni. 14. 6. Bernays takes etSos as es- quoting Physics I. 2 7, 8 185 b 3, g. 
sential nature , but compare Nic. Eth. Perhaps it only resumes a thought pre- 
VIII. 10. 4, 77 yap TraTpos irpos i/te?s viously expressed, then , accordingly : 
Koivwvia. /3a<rtXetas ?x e <- "X^/"a- see n. (ro; b). Eernays gives It is clear 

1 6 TW -yevi 8 tlvai riv avrov] So beforehand then. SUSEM. 

too in Pindar s words, eV dvdpuv v 6euv 20 Here TrXoOros = aperf /crTycrews, but 

7^05, K ,w,tas 5e -rrvtofiev /^arpos dfj.(p6- in 8 15 it is TrXydos opydvuv. 

repot New. 6. i, men are of one race with 21 jiaXXov TJ 8ov\wv] Cp. n. (33) on 

the gods, earth being the common mother 4 i /cat ifiv /cat ev tfv. SUSEM. (Ill) 

of both. The same is implied by Ilesiod s 2 25 TWV aXXtov %a)V sc. rts = ra?j 

verse ws b/j.60v yeydacri Oeol dvtjTol r dv- aXXw// aperd)^ ; Rhet. I. 6. 9 with Cope s n. 

I. 13. 6] 

1259 b 91260 a 7. 


e<jTi TO fyTovuevov KOI rrepl yvvaiKos KOI TratSos, (V) 
30 TTOTepa KOI TOVTWV elcrlv aperal, KOI Set rr/v yvvai/ca crdxhpova 
elvai Kal dvSpelav /cal StKalav, KOI TTCU? ecrrt teal CLKO- 
4 Xa^ro? Kal cruxfrpcov, 1} ov ; [/cat] KaOoKov Srj TOUT ecrrlv e 
TTTeov irepl dp^ofjievov (pvcret Kal dp^ovTos, Trorepov TJ 
dpeTTj rj erepa. el p,ev yap Set dfjifyoTepovs fJiere^eLV KO\O- 
35 KayaOias, Sid TL TOV fjuev dp^eiv Seoi dp TOV Be dp^ecrOai 
(ovBe yap T<W ud\\op Kal TJTTOV olov re Sta(f)e- 


pew TO /^ev yap dp^ecrOai Kal ap^eiv eiSet, 
5 Se paXkov Kal TJTTOV ovBev) el Se TOV fjuev Set TOV Se 
Oav^acTTOV. etre ydp 6 cip^wv /LIT) ecrrat (rwfypwv Kal 
40 Kaios, TTCO? dp^ei Ka\(3<> ; eW 6 dp%6fj,evo<>, TTCO? 

, a/coXaa"TO? ydp wv Kal SetXo? ovSev 
Trpoo-rjKovTwv. (fravepov TOLVVV cm dvd^jKi) pJkv 

elvau Siacfropds, wcnrep Ka TWV 
Kal TOVTO ev6i)s v<pr)yeiTai, nre- 
ydp ZCTTI <^vcret TO f^ev dp^ov TO & 

elvai dpeTijv, olov TOV \6yov (p. 21) 

\ d{i(f)OTepov$ dpeTrjs, 
6 (^vcrei ap^ovTwv KCLI 
5 pi Tr}V "^V^TIV ev 
dp%6[jievov, wv eTepav 

Kal TOV d\6yov, Sf)\ov 


30 vuxfrpova after 31 elvai II 2 Bk. || 31 /cat before a/c6XacrTos omitted by II 1 || 32 
Kal before Ka66\ov omitted by F M a || 37 dia&pei T$ Ar. 

1260 a 4 apxpvrwv Kal omitted by II Ar. Bk. || ixprj-yyTaL II 2 Bk. and p 1 in the 
margin, v0r/7eirai<rd> Schiitz; yet vfi-rjye iTai can also be used passively || 6 ^v 
elvai <pa/jt.v M H P 1 , f^ev (pa/j.v elvai. P 4 (corrector) 

3 31 ircus...o-oS<j>pa>v] Compare Nic. 
Eth. in. 12. 5 1119 a 33 : we apply the 
term ckoAaaia to the faults of children 
so far as they bear a certain resemblance 
to the vice of intemperance (d/coAao-ta). 
SUSEM. (Ill b) 

4 37 ei Sei 8ia<J>e pi] see on i 2. 

5 1260 a 3 w<rirpKal...(^p)(ojj.Vwv] 
sc. 8ia<popal elcri, as explained 5 2 ff. 

6 4 vtjxtyyefrrcu] "this is indicated 
(or, given in outline) in the case of the 
soul." The participle v^y^yueVos (i 3) 
seems evidence that the verb is used pas- 
sively (Bonitz Ind. Ar.}\ but Schiitz 
suggestion <ra> gives the middle a fair 
sense: " to this result the relations which 
exist in the soul at once lead us." SUSEM. 

6 (5v Tpav..-7 dXo-yov] "and we say 
that a different kind of excellence belongs 
to the one and to the other of these, I 
mean to the rational and irrational parts 
of the soul." Namely intellectual or 
dianoetic virtue (dperr/ Sia^ov/rt/cij) to the 

rational soul : moral virtue (T^I/O? apery, 
excellence of character) courage, temper- 
ance, etc. to the irrational appetitive 
soul ; Zeller II ii 624 658. The clianoe- 
tic virtues are discussed in B. vi of the 
Nic. Eth. and the latest detailed investi- 
gation of this subject, Walter op. c. 283 
537> gives the following results. 

Each of the three kinds of reason, 
theoretic, creative, and practical in the 
narrower sense (see n. 40), has its parti- 
cular dianoetic virtue, or it may be, vir- 
tues. Practical wisdom or insight (<pp6- 
PTJCTIS), if not the only virtue, is at all 
events the most indispensable and im- 
portant virtue of the practical reason 
(Walter p. 356 ff.); see on 5 9 n. (45); 
ill. 4 7, 8 nn. (4/4 6), 16, 17 nn. 
To theoretic reason belongs (i) vovs in 
the narrower sense, intelligence, corn- 
prehending in itself the two extremes 
of all indemonstrable knowledge, which 
must be assumed for every syllogism and 



[I. 13. 6 

7 e^ei KOI eVt TWV a\\cov. war <eVel> </>ucret TrXeto) ra 

Kal~\ apvo/Aeva (a\\ov yap TpoTrov TO e\ev6epov TOV Sov\ov 
Kal TO appev TOV 0ij\eos /cal avr)p TratSo?), fcai TTCKJIV 

8 WOT <&rei> Bernays, while Susem. 1 2 3 had simply ware || 7rXe/w TO, Ramus, 
TO, TrXetw F II Bk. || [apxovra /cat] Susem. 4 , especially as otherwise the insertion of 
eyrei, 1. 8, is untenable || 10 avrjp\ Trar-rjp ? Koraes 

for scientific demonstration ; at the lower 
end of the scale the immediate judgment 
of perception, and at the other end, by 
means of induction, the principles and 
axioms on which all demonstration, defi 
nition, and division rest : (ii) e-rri.- 
cTTifjfj. fj, demonstrated science with the 
exception of metaphysic ; and 
(iii) <ro(f)ia, wisdom, the highest or meta 
physical knowledge which consists of 
elements of both kinds, demonstrated 
truths and truths immediately known. It 
is of slight importance whether Zeller 
and Walter are right, that Aristotle re 
garded all three as dianoetic virtues , 
or whether, as Doring tries to prove 
against Walter in Kunstlehre des Arist. 
(Aristotle s Theory of Art] p. 62 f., only 
the third, aocpia, was really so considered 
by him. In the creative reason, lastly, 
T^X^J artistic skill, is not itself a dia 
noetic excellence, though it can lead to 
one, Nic, Eth. vi. 5. 7, 1140 b 21 f. 1 

For the excellences of character cp. 5 
6 n. (40) : in regard to temperance in 
particular II. 6 9 n. (206 b), 5 10 . 
(162), 7 12, in. 4 16 n. (491), IV 
(vii). i 4 n. (693). SUSEM. (112) 

7 TOIVVV] See on i. But" 1 or 
noiv it is clear (Bonitz). 

7 8 ff. " Since then there are by nature 
various sorts of things subjected to rule 
(the rule of a free man over a slave being 
different from that of a husband over a 
wife, and again from that of an adult 
over a child), and all have the elements 
of the soul present in them, only in dif 
ferent degrees (the slave in general being 
destitute of the deliberative faculty, which 
in the woman has not sufficient authority 
and in the boy is as yet undeveloped) ; 

1 Whether this is really Aristotle s theory or 
not, Doring does not venture to decide. I see 
no ground for doubt. But perhaps Aristotle 
wished to restrict this artistic excellence to the 
higher group of arts, the imitative arts, see n. 
(34). If this be so Walter s conception of them, p. 
512, is unaffected by Boring s objection, p. 65 n. 
In Nic. Rth. i. 13. 20 trvVecri?, apprehension, 
see Pol. in. 4 16, 17 nn. (497, 8), yi(iv). 4. 
14 n. (1186) is adduced as a dianoetic virtue 
along with cro^La. and ^poVrjcri?. It would take too 
long to explain how this is to be understood. 

for this reason the ruler requires the intel 
lectual virtue in perfection (for the work 
belongs simply to the master-workman, 
and here this is reason), while each of the 
others needs only his fitting share thereof. 
And so, too, must it be with the moral vir 
tues : we must suppose all to need a share 
of them, though not equally, but only in 
so far as each requires for his work." 

Bernays defending the order of the 
mss. translates from 14 o^oiws as follows : 
A similar gradation must likewise be 
assumed for the moral virtues : all must 
possess them, though not equally, but 
only in such measure as is necessary for 
their respective duties. The ruler must 
have moral virtue in its perfection ; for 
every work depends in all its parts on 
the supreme master, and reason" i.e. that 
which makes the ruler a ruler "is su 
preme master" ; if then the work is to be 
successful, the rider must satisfy the de 
mands of reason on all sides, and must 
therefore possess complete moral virtue. 
" Those again who obey need severally 
so much virtue as is proportional to their 
share of the total work." This however 
does not meet Thurot s objections, Etudes 
i6ff. "The transposition is indispensa 
ble. From the proposition reason is the 
master-workman it first follows that the 
ruler must possess the highest intellectual 
virtue, and only secondarily that he must 
have the highest moral virtue. Aristotle 
has been speaking (a 2 7) of a virtue of 
the rational, and of a virtue of the irra 
tional, part of the soul, and he admits 
(a 10 14) that both these parts are pos 
sessed by slaves, women, and children. 
Before going on to inquire how they all 
share in the moral virtue of the irrational 
part he must have noticed the manner 
in which they share in the intellectual 
virtue of the rational part. Indeed the 
words which Bernays inserts the de 
mands of reason on all sides imply the 
dianoetic virtue." Cp. Hermes XIX. pp. / 
588 592, Quaest. Crit. vi. p. 9 f. SUSEM/ ( 

9 d\Xov -yap rpoirov] See 12 i, 
ov TOV O.VTQV Tpbirov TTJS apx^s. SUSEM. 

I. 13. 9] 1260 a 81260 a 22. 199 

pev rd fjiopia rrjs tyv^s, aXX evv7rdp%ei Sia- (V) 
(6 fjiev yap SouXo? 0X0)? OVK e^ei TO ftovKevriKov, 
TO Se OrfXv %i pep, aXX dtcvpov, 6 Se Trat? e%ei /JLCV, 
8 aXX areXe?) opofcos Totvw dva-yKaiov ^X lv Ka ^ T^ T &s 7 

15 tfOiKcis dpTas vTTo\T\irrov 8eiv p.ev p-erexav irdvras, ciXX 


SAO TOV [lev apftovra Te\eav e^eiv Set Tr\v <$iavo>r)Ti,Kr)v 

apeTrjv (TO yap epyov eo~Tlv aTrXcw? TOV dp^iTe/CTOvos, 6 Se 

19 Xofyo? dp^LT6KTcoi>}, TWV 8 d\\a)v e/cacrTOV, o<rov eVt/SaXXet 

14 avrot?. <ofjioi(j)<$ Toivvv avayicalov %6iv Kal Trepi ra? 

J 5 <r)6i,Kds dpeTas UTroX^Trreo^ Set^ /xei^ yu-ere^etz/ irdvTas, aXX 

16 <OU TW CLVTOV TpOTTOV, XX* 0(7O^ 6/CaCTTW 7T/30? TO aVTOU pJOV.> 

9 cocTTe fyavepov OTL ecrT\v <GfcdcrTOv ISia r)> rjOiicri dpeTTj TGOV elprj- 8 
21 fj,evo)V djrdvTwv, Kal ov% r) avTrj crw^poavv^ yuvaiKos Kal dvSpos, 
ovB dvSpta Kal BiKCUoavvr}, KadaTrep wero ^coKpaT^, aXX 

14 o^o^ws ...... 16 tpyov Thurot Susem. transpose to follow 20 auro?s : see Introd. 

p. 79 i| Bernays transposes avayKauov, Welldon dvayKcuov %x eLV to follow 16 a\X oVof, 
and both punctuate 15 aperds \nro\r]TrT^ov dew, rejecting Thurot s proposed transpo 
sition. See Comm. || 15 After virdXyirTtov corr. 2 of P 2 inserts yap, Ar. Se (so also 
Koraes in his commentary) || i6aurou Bk., avrovT II || 17 dLavorjTiKrjv Thurot, 
rjOiKyv T II Ar. Bk. Bernays || 20 <KdffTov idia -?)> yOiKy Susem. 4 t Sta ^ ? Susem. 
earlier, olnela or olnela 17 Schmidt, [^^i/c ))] Thurot || 21 (nravrwv II 1 P 4 , irdvruv P 2>3< 
Q S b T b Aid. Bk. || 22 6 ZWK/KXTT?? P 4 , which Wilson (perhaps rightly) approves 

12 6 [i^v ydp-.-povXevTiKov] Just the have ever so small a share of approximate 
same thing is said in other words 5 9 intellectual virtue in the department of 
n. (45). See also n. (115). SUSEM. (114) practice, such virtue consists merely in 

13 e xi jJ-e v, dXX dKvpov] Cp. n. (117). the fact that one slave understands his 
This can establish a difference of degree master s commands and knows how to 
only, not a difference of kind, between execute them better, more quickly, and 
the virtue of a man and of a woman. more aptly than another. SUSEM. (115) 
See in. 4. 17 n. (495). SUSEM. (114 to) 19 ^KCKTTOV] sc. %x etv ^ e T ^ v - ^p. 

8 17 TTJV < oiavo> lyriKT^v dpcTi^v] ImpaXXci] so far as is incumbent on 

It is self-evident that only the dianoetic them. Impersonal; cp. De long, vitae 

virtue of practical life, <j)pdvr)(ns or prac- I. 4, 464 b 33, \eKrov ocrov evrt/SaXXei 

tical wisdom, is here treated: see nn. ry ^vaiicy <f>i\o<ro<f>la: Herod, n. 180 roi)s 

(45) (112); iv(vil). i. 4 (693). Where AeX0oi)s rj e?re/3aXXe 7rapacr%e?i/. 

it is a question of executing another s 16 ocrov eKao-ro)] sc. eTn/ijaXXei. 

command, as it is always and uncondi- 9 20 <lKdcrrou ISia TJ> dperi^ KrX] 

tionally with the slave, there this virtue " that the moral virtue of each of the 

belongs only to him who gives the com- above classes is peculiar to itself." Ber- 

mand, he who obeys having merely right nays translates as if he had before him 

opinion about it. All the difference now the words inserted. 

is, whether he can attain this right ap- 22 2coKpo,TT|s] The historical Socrates 

prehension more or less easily, thoroughly unquestionably did so, Xen. Symp. 2. 9; 

or carelessly : 111.4. 18 n. (498). Com- cp. Zeller op. c. n i 221 [Eng. tr. So- 

pare also nn. on in. 4 16 (493), 17 crates and Socratics p. 145 n. i]. But 

(497), 7, 8 (474 6). But so far as a here no doubt Aristotle has in view the 

natural slave, who is denied every ca- Platonic Socrates; amongst other pas- 

pacity for deliberation, can be said to sages in Meno 71 D f. , to which he alludes 



[I. 13. 9 

/} ^ev dp^L/crj dvBpla rj 8 VTrrjpeTifcr}, 6/W&>9 $ e ^et KOI (V) 
10 irepl T<2? a XXa?. Bi)\ov Be TOVTO KOI Kara //,6/DO? paXKov eVt- 
25 (TKOTTOVCTLV Ka66\ov ydp ol Xeyozre? e^arraTwo-LV eavrovs on 
TO ev e%t,v~Trjv *fyv)(f}v ctperr}, rj TO opOoTrpayeiv, rj TI TWV TOLOV- 
TWV TroXi) yap d/J,eivov \eyovo~w ol e^apiO/^ovvTes ra? ape- 
11 ra9j cocnrep Topylas, TWV o#r&>? opi^o/Aevcov. Bio Bel, coaTrep 6 
7roi7]Trj$ eiprjfce Trepl fyvvat/cos, OVTO) vofii^eiv e%iv Trepl rrdvTwv 
30 yvvaiid Koo-pov fj o-iyr) <e pei, 9 

Brj\ov OTI 

a XX dvBpl ovKeTi TOVTO. eirel Be 7ral<$ 

24 /cat, which Ar. leaves untranslated, Lambin omitted || 26 ^ rb II 1 P 4 6 L 8 
W b Ald., ml rb Q Ar., rb p^-S b T b |] TOIOVTOV for TWV TOIOIJTWV M 8 ? 1 || 31 o 
before TTCUS omitted by II 1 

more distinctly 10 n. (118). Like So 
crates in Xenophon /. <:., Plato (Rep. V. 
452 E f.) holds that, apart from beget 
ting and bearing children, the difference 
between the sexes is a difference of de 
gree: upon this is based his demand that 
women should share in the education of 
men, in war and public business, also 
(although this is expressly stated only in 
the Laws] in the public messes : see n. 5 
i . (153), 6 5 ;z. (196), 7 i . 
(231 b). Further, community of wives 
in the two upper classes of his ideal-state 
(ii. i 3 ff., 7 i) is clearly connected 
with this ; compare n. (142) on II. 2 9, 
Zeller op. c. n i 775 [Eng. tr. Plato p. 
481], Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 168170. 
Aristotle on the contrary records the 
results of careful scientific observations 
on the difference in temperament between 
the two sexes in Hist. Anivi. IX. i 5, 
7> 8 608 a 21 ff. : rd GrjXea. (CtaXa/cu)- 
repa Kal KaKovpyorepa /cat rjTrov ciTrAa /cat 
TrpoTrere crrepa /cat Trepl TTJV rdov TKVWV 

JJLOV /jLo\\ov TO 6ij\vTov appevos /cat 8vcre\7rL, 
/cat dvaideffTepov /cat ^evoearepov, evaira- 
rrjTorepov 8e /cat fj.vrnji.ovLK.(jOTepov, TL 8 
aypvirvbrepov /crX. Cp. De gener. anim. 
iv. 6. 10 f. , 775 a 12, and Zeller II ii 688 
with n. (3). SUSEM. (116) 

23 TJ ClpXlKT^ KT\J Cp. III. 4 

3 n. (470), 1 6 . (491), 17 n. (495): 
also i. 5 7 . (42 b), 12 i, 2 nn. See 
on the other side n. (120) on i. 13 n. 
SUSEM. (117) 

10 24 Kara jxepos] in detail . 

25 The same protest in Nic. Eth. n. 
7 i,cp.2 3, 4 . 

26 TO cv ^x iv ] P^to Rep. iv. 444 E 
u^tetd rts /cat eveta i/ i X^ 5 : ^^T- 506 D 

rdet TeTO.yfJ.tvov ecrrtv r/ dper-Jj e/cdcrrou. 

27 ot e^ap. KT\] As Gorgias does in 
Plato s -M-W0 71 r> f., where the Platonic 
Socrates attacks the doctrine. Aristotle 
is here defending Gorgias against that 
polemic and expresses his agreement 
with him in the main. Schlosser well 
observes that the defence certainly misses 
the mark, as Plato in the Meno insists 
with perfect right that the generic notion 
of virtue ought first to be defined, and in 
the Ethics Aristotle starts from that. On 
Gorgias see n. (448) to in. 2. 2. SUSEM. 

11 28 6 irou]Tijs] Sophocles Ajax 
293. See further . (117). SUSEM. (119) 
31 errel 8e KT\] "Since the child has 
not yet fully developed, his excellence is 
not to be referred simply and solely to 
himself, but to perfect development and 
the standard of his educator." 

The slave s moral excellence is re 
stricted to that which fits him to be well 
employed by his master, the child s to 
that which fits him to be well trained by 
his father. In the child only the germ of 
human virtue is present (Nic. Eth. I. 9. 
10, in. 12. 5 ff.); on this see iv(vn). 13. 
5 n - (875): but in the adult slave, so far 
as he possesses the indispensable mini 
mum of such a virtue at all, it is at least 
actually developed. Children and slaves 
have only to obey ; the wife must indeed 
obey her husband, but then she has along 
with him to command the remaining 
members of the family. This implies 
that her virtue is not merely vTr-rjpeTiKr/, as 
Aristotle inexactly puts it 9. Further 
with 8 n compare Poetics 15 3 
and note (191 b) in Susemihl s edition. 
SUSEM. (120) 

I. 13. 13] 

1260 a 231260 a 41. 


rovrov fjiev KOI 77 dperrj OVK avrov TT/OO? avrov eorriv, d\\d TT/OO? (V) 
12 TO reXo? KOI rov tfyov/jievov. o/Ww? Se KOI $ov\ov TT/OO? ^eairoTrjv. 
e0{iV Se 7T/90? rdvaj/cala XpijaifJLOV elvai rov &ov\ov, 
35 ware &r)\ov on Kal dperrjs Selrai fJUKpas, teal roaavr^ OTTCO? 10 
prjre Si d/co^aaiav fAtjre Sid Sei\tav eXXel^y rwv ep<ywv. drro- 
ptjcreie 8 civ Tt?, TO vvv elpT]fjL6vov el d\rj6es, dpa /cal TOI)? (p-2 2 ) 
re%viras SeijcTei ^X l/v dperrjv 7roXXa/a? <ydp Si* dKO\aaiav 
\ 13 eXK.eirrova L rwv epycov. rj $ta(})epei rovro rrKelarov ; o /juev ydp 
40 SoO/Yo? KOLVWVOS farjs, o Se Troppcorepov, /cal TOCTOVTOV CTTL- 
(3d\\ei dpT7J^ oaov Trep /cal Sov\6ia<; 6 yap ftdvavaos re- 

32 O.VTOV F (ad se if sum William) 33 rb rAos] rov rtXeiov P 4 6 W b L e Ar. Aid. 
Bk. || 36 eXXe^et P 3 (but e\\el\f>Ti corr. 1 ) Gottl. Bk. 2 Susem. 1 2 3 perhaps rightly 
|| [d7ro;o?7<reie...b 2 Tex T wi ] Schmidt || 37 apa F II 2 (yet Q perhaps has apa) \\ 
39 T)<OV. dvayKOiov 5 > cua^e/aei < y > Schmidt. || rourcoi/ II 1 (emended apparently 
by P 1 ) II 4 Whether Ar. read aOry in his ms. after TOVOVTOV as I once assumed 

from his translation, is more than doubtful: TOO-OVTOV <O.VT$> ? Schneider 
j3d\\et] eVi/3aXTcu Schmidt \\ 41 ^- 8ov\iKr)S > or <inrr]peTiK7]S> before 
? Susem. (see Comm.); yet in 38 O/JCT^ alone expresses this ?rep omitted by 
F M B , hence [irep] Susem. 1 

12 35 dpTT]S 36 fp-ywv] But 

how on Aristotle s own psychology and 
theory of virtue is even this minimum of 
moral virtue, which is the condition of 
his serviceableness, possible in the slave, 
if he shows no trace of deliberation or 
purposed action of his own ? See Nic. 
Eth. in. cc. 2, 3, Walter op. c. p. 169 ff., 
212 ff., Zeller op. c.\\\\ 590 n. (3). Yet 
all goodness or badness of character and 
conduct is derived from the quality of 
the Trpoaipe<ri.s, i.e. from the bent of the 
will in intention and purpose : Poet. 6 
5, 6, 17, 15 i, n. (884) on Pol. iv 
(vn). 13 9. Plato speaks far more 

humanely on this subject Laws vi. 776 D, 
where he admits that ere now many a 
one has found in his slaves men on 
all points of more approved virtue than 
his brothers or sons. But in this he 
contradicts the fundamental assumptions 
which he makes in common with Ar 
istotle ; cp. Zeller n i 755 f. [Eng. tr. 
Plato p. 459]. Aristotle himself grants 
that even slaves may have a noble cha 
racter, Poet. 15 i, Ko.1 yap yvvij <TTI 
XPW 7 " ? Ka -i SoOXos, Kairoi ye i crws rotf- 
rwv TO /x^ x e ?P ov T0 S 6 Xws <pav\ov ^ffriv. 
If he is more consistent elsewhere, his con 
sistency only involves the whole theory in 
self-contradiction in another way, and 
discloses all the more its untenableness 
on internal grounds: see 5 8 n. (43), 

9 n. (45): also p. 211. SUSEM. (121) 

39 T| introduces Aristotle s own view : 
"or shall we rather say..." more freely; 
"surely here is a very great difference." 

13 40 KOIVWVOS t w ">is] whereas the 
citizens are KOLVWVOL fiiov. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 
4, rovro 5 earl KOIVUVUV /3tou irpbs TO 
elvai avrdpKeiav : the slave is excluded 
from fiios, ib. X. 6. 8 evdai/j.ovias 8 ovSels 
ai>5pair68q) /jLeradidwffiv, el /ULTJ /cat /St ou. 

o de iroppwrepov] further removed , 
less dependent on his master. 

TOCTOVTOV impdXXei apCTfjs] sc. avrtf: 
just so much of virtue as of slavery falls to 
his share. The verb intransitive but per 
sonal. Comp. ill. 6. 3, /ca# b ffov eTTi- 
jSciXXet fj.^pos eKcurrto rov ffiv /caXws: iv(vil). 
i. 10, e/cdcrry r^s evdacfAovias ^7T6/3dXXei 
roaovrov b aovTrep dper^s: Herod. IV. 115, 
vii. 23, Dem. DC Cor. 254, p. 312, 2. 

"This special virtue, i.e. excellence of 
function, of the free workman differs from 
the true virtue of man in being something 
inferior and approximating to that of the 
slave: see 11. (103) on u 6 with the 
references, esp. ill. 4. 12 n. (486)." 
SUSEM. (122) 

Mr T. L. Heath objects to this, that if 
roaovrov is the subject of eVt/SdXXet, the 
change of subject from 8 de is surely very 
harsh. Indeed, without aury, is it not 
inconceivably harsh? I think the sen 
tence would go much better, if we could 


nOAITIKflN A. 13. 

[I. 13. 13 

SovKeiav, Kal 6 


SoOXo? (V) 



260 b xyrri^ wpio-fjievrjv TLVCL 


14 fyavepov TOIVVV on rfjs roiavr^ aperr? anov evai et ro> n 

Sov\(p TOV SecnroTTiv, d\\ ov <TO* > rrjv SiSacrKaKiKrjv e%ovTa TOOV 
5 epycov [Se<T7TOTi/ciji>~\. Sio \eyovori,v ov Ka\w<$ ol \6yov TOI)? SouXou? 

cLTroaTepovvTes Kal fyddKOVTes eVtrafet xpvjaOai, JAOVOV vov0e- 

TijTeov <yap paXKov rovs $ov\ov$ r) roi/9 TralSas. 
15 d\\d Trepl JJLZV TOVTCOV SicopiaOa) TOV rpoirov TOVTOV Trepl 

S dv&pbs Kal yvvaiKO$ Kal TCKVCOV Kal Trarpos, 7-17? re 

1260 b 4 <rbv> Schneider following Ar. ; rbv for rrjv Scaliger Reiske || 5 [5e- 
(nroTiKrjv] Giphanius (cp. the Comm. ); Koraes conjectures ewicrTrj^v, Bender SouXi^ ; 
5ea"iroTiKy, transposed to follow eTrtra^ei, Schmidt 

sion of its functions. The master may 
entrust his steward with the employment 
and direction of the slaves in his service, 
as Aristotle ironically remarks, 7 5 : 
but he must himself develope in them the 
minimum of virtue which they require for 
this. Cp. n. (64) on 7 5. In line 5 de- 
(nroTiKrjv must be wrong : dovXixriv is what 
we require, and Bender would accord 
ingly insert it in the text. But neither 
dovXiKrjv nor decnroriKTii is free from gram 
matical objections ; I prefer therefore to 
bracket the word. SUSEM. (123) 

Here decnroTiKr] or decnrorela. is the art 
of making good servants. The house 
hold like the state exercises a moral 
superintendence over its members, 13 
i, and its head is responsible for their 
moral improvement. 

5 ol \6yov. . .6 piovov] " Those who per 
mit no conversation with slaves, and hold 
that we should merely give them orders." 
Plato Laws 777 E , rty de OIK^TOV Trp^crprj- 
aiv xpri cr%eSov eirLra^LV Trdcrav yiyvecrOai. 
Elsewhere Plato strongly recommends a 
humane treatment of slaves : see n. (121) 
on 12. SUSEM. (124) 

Plato s view is still from time to time 
approved, as notably by George Eliot. 

6 vou0TTjTov] Plato ib. Ko\deu> ye 
p.T]V ev 8iKrj dov\ovs del Kal /m.r] i>ov0TOvi>Tas 
ws e\evdepovs OpvwTeaOai Troiecv. 

7 [xdXXov] Because the slave, albeit 
unable to deliberate rationally himself, 
yet, as an adult, understands better than 
the child the rational admonitions con 
veyed to him by others (Fiilleborn II. 
184). Compare n. (120) on n above, 
and ;/. (45) on 5 9. SUSEM. (125) 

15 8 Sio>pio-0a> TOV Tpoirov TOVTOV] 
Compare the close of c. 7. 

make 5 8e the subject of e7ri/3aXXe. I 
should translate the artizan is further 
removed and entrenches on virtue only 
to the same degree as he entrenches on 
slavery. Cf. for the supposed use of 
e?rt/3aXXet De caelo I. 5io, 272a25 ocrov 
yap TI ere pa. [ypa/jifj.r]\ e7Ti/3aXXa rrjs erepas, 
/cat i] ertpa eKeLvrjs TOVOVTOV, where iiri- 
fta\\eiv contrasts with a7ro\ucr6ai. Is 
there any reason why e7ri/3aXXei should 
not = eTraXXarret ? " In point of fact 
this is perhaps the right construction. 
That we require ai/r with the other, 
was pointed out by M. Schmidt and by 
me in my first edition (1872). At the 
same time is not dperrjs by itself also 
strange? (See Critical Notes). If some 
thing like 5ov\ov or rijs Toiai/Tys has been 
lost, a.vT$ may well have been lost with 
it. We certainly should expect he shares 
in servile virtue in so far as his condition 
approximates to a slave s. SUSEM. 

1260 b i ct<})wp. TWX ^x l SovXefav^is 
under a definite, limited form of slavery. 
Cbmp. Rhet. i. i i, 1354 a 3, with 
Cope s note : also wptoy^pcus above 4 i, 
n. (34). Some interpret wrongly, de 
tached from the master. That the slaves 
should be ranked as a natural class and 
the artizans (who had largely sprung from 
them, in. 5. 3) as an artificial class, is 
significant of the Greek contempt for 
labour. See n. (93). 

14 4 <TOV> n^v SiSao-K. ^x VTCt ] 
" the person who instructs him in routine 
duties." This is the possessor of, or pro 
ficient in, the SouXt/CTj eTricm^o? which is 
more fully described above 7 2, where 
it is distinguished from decriroTiK^. The 
discussion on the virtue of the slave 
results in a more precise determination of 
and its elevation by an exten 

1260 b 11260 b 24. 


I. 13. 16] 

10 e fcao-rov avrwv dperrjs Kal rfjs 7rpo9 <7(/>a9 ai;Tou9 o/<ttXta9, (V) 
Tt TO /eaXo)9 Kal fir) /eaXw9 ear/, Kal 7TW9 Set TO JJLZV ev Stw- 
KCIV TO Se KaKO)<? cfrevyeiv, ev Tot9 Trept [Ta9] ?roXtTe/a9 avay- 
Kalov e r jre\6elv. eirel yap oiKia fjiev Trdcra /juepos 7roXe&)9, ravra 12 
S otVta-9, rrjv Se TOU /JLepovs TTpos rr]v TOV oXou Set fiXeTreiv 
15 dperrjv, dvayKaiov irpbs rrjv r jro\ireiav /3Xe7roz/Ta9 TraiSeveiv 
Kal TOU9 7ratSa9 /fat T9 ryvvaiKas, elirep Tt Sta^epet ?rpo9 TO 
T?}^ TroXtz^ etz^at crTrovSaiav KOL TOU9 ?ratSa9 elvai 
16 /cat T9 yvvaiKas crrrovSaias. dvajKalov Se Siafyepeiv at 
fyap yvvaiKes TJ/MLCTV pepo? rcov eXevdepwv, eK Se TCOZ^ ?rai 

ryivovrai rrjs TroXtTeiW COCTT eVet Trept yLteiv rovrcov 
rrepl Se TW^ \oirrwv ev aXXot9 \eKreov, d(f)evT$ a; 9 TeXo9 
T07)9 z^i)^ Xo7ou9, d\\7jv dp^r/v TTOLrjaa/jievoi Xeyw/juev, 
il Trpcorov e Trtcr/ee^co/ze^a Trept TcGz^ dTro^Tjvajjievcov Trepl T^9 

12 Nickes omits ras, following Ar. || 13 5teX#eu> Schmidt f| 17 /cat is omitted 
by II 1 , [/cat] Susem. 1 2 * || 20 oiKovb^oi F, ot KOLVWVOI IT Bk., (/z^ gubernant (ot a/co- 
VO/ULOI?) Ar. I] [e?rei...2i Xe/cr^oi ] and 22 [X^w^ej/ /cat] Schmidt H 24 TroXtretas T^S 

d/)tCTT7JS II 2 Bk. 

11 TI r6 KaXcos sc. 6 / utXe?i (Congreve). 
irws Set TO |XV tu <d / u,tXe?i > SLCOKSLV, 
how the right intercourse ought to be 
followed: cp. TO Se /ca/cws <apxea 0ai Kal 
a/3%eii/> dcru / u0o/c)ws ecrrtv d/j.^o iv, 6 10. 

12 iv Tots-.-iroXiTeCas] This discus 
sion means the scheme of the best state 
more especially, as is shown by the reason 
subjoined. But so far as that has come 
down to us in B. iv(vn) and v(vin), 
this point was never reached, nor the 
question of the proper training and edu 
cation of the women. Cp. Introd, p. 49 
n. (4), p. 52. SUSEM. (126) 

15 dva-yKcuov] Probably because the 
family will then be treated as a part of 
the state, and will be better understood in 
relation to the whole. Comp. n. (33). 

irpos TT|V iroXiTiav KT\] Cp. v(vill). 

1. i, vm(v). g. ii ff., and Nic. Eth. v. 

2. ii, TO, 5 Troir/TiKa TTJS oXrjs aperrjs 
eon r&v vo/j.i/ji.(t)i> oaa vei>o/ut.odtTr)Tai irepi 
Traideiav rty irp&s rb KOLVOV KT\, with 
Jackson s notes. The all important 
term iroKireLa will be fully explained in 
B. in (i i, c. 3, 6 i &c). It will 

be found to be a much wider term than 
constitution or form of government 
(rd|ts r&v apx&v), cis indeed the English 
word polity is still. See vi(iv). ii. 
3, fiios risecm TroXews, and n. (466) on ill. 

3- 9- 

1 6 8icu}> pi Trpos=is an important 
means towards the excellence of the city : 
literally "makes a difference with regard 
to..." So iv(vil). 14. 7, Trpbs TO Ka\bi> 

16 1 8 al |Xv...eXv0pcov] Cp. n. 9 

5> 6 n. (285), Plato Laws vi 781 B, ov 
yap rj/jiiffv /j-ovov ecrrtV, ws do^eiev d v, TO 
irepl TasyvvatKas. SlJSEM. (127) 

20 olKovojioi,, administrators, TTJS ?roXt- 
ret as suits Aristotle s views elsewhere at 
least as well as oi Koivwvol: see in. 4 
14, 15; iv(vn). 1 4 4 6. 

21 <x<J>VTs KrX] "let us dismiss the 
present discussion as complete, and carry 
on our subject from a fresh starting-point. 
And first let us review those theorists 
who have put forward a scheme for the 
best form of polity." With TOI)S vvi> 
\6yovs cp. TO^J irp&Tovs \6yovs, III. 6. 3. 




THE most detailed account we have of Epimenides is in Diog. Laert. I. 
109 115 (cp. Suidas s. z/.), whilst of modern writers Heinrich Epimenides of 
Crete (Leipzig 1801. 8), Hock Krcta in. 246 ff., and C. Schultess De Epi- 
mcnide Crete (Bonn 1877. 8) give the fullest particulars. He was probably of 
Phaistos in Crete, but lived principally at Knosos and was held in unbounded 
esteem as an expiatory priest, a prophet, and a worker of magical cures. 
At the same time, it would appear, he was shrewd in practical statesmanship, 
so that some reckoned him among the seven wise men. His whole history 
is mythical. He is said to have reached the age of 154 or 157, or in the 
Cretans version of the story, of 299 years, and further to have passed 57 years 
of his early life asleep in a cave. The story of his having effected the 
purification of Athens about 596 B.C. has been shown to be unhistorical 
by Niese Contributions to the history of Solon and of his time pp. 12 14 
(in Historische Untersuchungen Arnold S chafer geividmct, Bonn 1882). 
Whether he owes his place among the seven sages solely to this work 
attributed to him as Solon s coadjutor, which is Niese s opinion, is not so 
certain. For to all appearance it is on better authority, at the least, that 
he is said to have played an important part in Sparta about 580 B.C., 
where he seems to have pronounced the oracles whereby the transference 
of the election of ephors from the kings to the popular assembly 1 re 
ceived the requisite religious sanction 2 . In connexion with this he 
introduced there the worship of the Cretan moon-goddess Pasiphae and 
her oracular dreams : in their ancient official building the ephors had 
a memorial to him (Paus. III. 11. 11) and even preserved the hide, 
or animal s skin inscribed with oracles which he was alleged to have 
written. See Urlichs On the Rhctra of Lycurgus in the Rhein. Mus. VI. 
1848. 217230, Duncker History of Antiquity VI. p. 352 ff. ed. 5 (1882), 
Schafer De cphoris Lacedaemoniis pp. 14 21 (Leipzig and Greifswald, 
1863. 4); also Gilbert Studicn (Studies in the history of ancient Sparta] 
p. 185, Frick De ephoris Spartanis p. 31 f. (Gottingen 1872. 8). There is a 
curious story which makes him come to Athens only ten years before the 
Persian wars, and there prophesy these wars, Plato Laws I 642 D. The works 
attributed to him in Diog. Laert. I. in two epics, KovpiJTvv KOI Kop 

1 If indeed, considering the strange ably later period. Of course the ephors 
method by which the ephors were se- did not attain their new position at a 
lected (see n. on n. 9. 23), they can be single blow, as it were, by the mere fact 
said to have been elected by the popular that their election was taken out of the 
assembly at all. hands of the kings. On the contrary it 

2 Trieber (Forschungen Berlin 1871. 8) must evidently have taken long and 
Researches into the history of the Spartan arduous struggles to change the dispro- 
constitution, p. I3off, has indeed endea- portionate superiority of the kingly power 
vourecl to prove that the new position of into corresponding inferiority. 

the ephors did not begin until a consider- 


yeveais /cot Qeoyovia, and Apyous vavmjyia re KOI idaovos els KoX^ouj o 
with prose works Trept Ovo-iav and Trepi r?;? eV Kp^/ TroXireias never had any 
existence : they are a mere invention of the romancer Lobon of Argos in 
his work Trept Troi^roSz , as Hiller has shown in the Rhein. Mus. xxxni. 1878. 
525 ff. Other works really appeared under the name of Epimenides, of 
which some were forgeries attributed to him, others the writings of a later 
Epimenides. The Fathers mention a work On Oracles, Trepl XPWP&VI which 
can hardly be a prose writing by him, but rather a collection of his oracles ; 
if it is here that the hexameter Kpfjrfs del ^euo-rat, KCIKCI drjpla, yao-re pe? 
dpyai occurs, which the writer of the Epistle to Titus, I. 13, attributes to 
one of the Cretan prophets, Wios CWTVV npo^rjTrjs, without mentioning his 
name. Theodoret indeed ascribes the verse to Callimachus, but in his hymn 
to Zeus (1. 8) only the first words are found : hence Epiphanius (c. haer. I. 14) 
and Hieronymus (T. vil A. p. 707 Vail.) remark that Callimachus on the 
contrary first took them from Epimenides : cp. Liibeck Hieronymus p. 12 f. 
However that may be, the word quoted by Aristotle most probably occurred 
in a hexameter, very likely in a collection of oracles which Aristotle had 
before him, of which Epimenides was the reputed author. Moreover, in 
Rhet. in. 17. 10, 1418 a 23 f., Aristotle says that Epimenides did not divine 
the future, but only interpreted the obscurities of the past, Trepl T>V eVopeVcoy 
OVK eficuTeveTO, aXXct Trepl TO>V yeyovorcov p-eV, aSr/Xcoy 8e ; and this could hardly 
be affirmed except upon the evidence of such a collection. What con 
nexion there was between this published collection of his oracles and the one 
which was jealously guarded at Sparta, it is impossible to say. SUSEM. (17) 

ON i. 6 i8, 1255 a 5 b 3. 

THE recent contributions of Jackson Postgate and Ridgeway to the 
explanation of this passage, referred to in n. (51) on 6 i, have not super 
seded the more successful results attained by Hampke in ihePMfafogusXXIV. 
1866. 172 ff. Jackson however has the credit of clearing up the sense of 
cui/ota, and Ridgeway by restoring the right punctuation has helped to correct 
Hampke s interpretation and to remove apparent difficulties. He saw that 
in 4 the words 17 6ta yap... 19 ap^ei!/ form a parenthesis, and hence that the 
eVet following refers not to this parenthesis but to the sentence which pre 
cedes it. 

Aristotle admits that not every form of actual slavery is natural ; a dis 
tinction must be drawn between a slave who is so by nature and a slave 
according to convention and law. The two may, but need not necessarily, 
coincide. There are natural bondsmen who are not as a matter of fact 
enslaved, and people who are not nature s slaves are actually in servi 
tude: the former though not in slave s estate deserve to be so; while the 
latter, although held in bondage, are undeserving of it. The (unwritten) 
law in question consists in the universal agreement that prisoners captured 

206 EXCURSUS // 

in war are the slaves of their conquerors (ev TO. Kara 7r6\fj.ov 
Ta>v KpciTovvToiv eivai <t>a.<Tiv). This brings Aristotle to the two extreme and 
opposite views between which his own holds the mean, the views of the 
unconditional opponents (A) and of the unconditional defenders (B) of each 
and every form of slavery. He first speaks of the former, remarking that 
they impeach the legality of the convention or positive law in question, 
inasmuch as the better man may become the slave of the stronger or more 
powerful, whereas in a rational state of society virtue is the sole title to 
rule 1 . This then is their view (11 ovrwr) : the others (B), on the contrary, 
take the former view, e/caVoos, that namely prescribed by the foregoing posi 
tive law. The two views stand sharply opposed (19 odaravrat X W P LS } anc ^ i n 
conflict (dp,<pio-^TT]a-is), yet they have a common point of contact (eVaXXar- 
TOVO-I), both facts being due to one and the same cause. Aristotle might 
have prevented all misapprehension of these words if he had written rroiel 
de in line 13. This common cause of both facts is, namely, that virtue 
(apcrr/) is that which primarily gives force and might, and that without 
some sort of excellence the exercise of force is impossible (on rponov TWO. 
dperrj Tvy^dvovcra ^oprjyias KOI (Sid^eadai 8vvarai /zaXiora, KOL earns del TO Kparovv 
fv vnepoxfj dyaQov TLVOS) , only, of course, virtue still requires the indispensable 
condition of favourable external circumstances (xopyyia). This then is the com 
mon point in the two contending views, the point where Aristotle agrees with 
both, that in the first place only virtue deserves to rule, and in the second 
place the requisite force to ruleessentiaUydepends upon yirtue_(Mg rg done iv 
IJLT) avev aperfyfeirai TTJV (3iav). But from this common point the conflict 
between the two theories breaks out on the question, wherein right and 
justice consists (dXXa Trepi roO SIKCU OU povov eivai rr)v dp,(pt.(r[BriTr)O iv). Just for 
this reason (8ia rouro) the opponents of all slavery make the essence of right 
to consist in the mutual good- will of rulers and ruled : i.e. in the^ilctthat the 
ruler, on his part, does not govern in his own selfish interests, but for the 
welfare of his subjects ; and in the willing obedience, on their part, of the 
ruled. In other words they transfer to the relations between master and 
servant the principle which Aristotle himself recognizes as the true one in the 
state, where he uses it to distinguish " normal polities " from " degenerate 
forms " (irapeicpdo-cis). In this Aristotle discovers their mistake :. they assume 
that the truly virtuous man cannot desire to exercise any other kind of lord 
ship, that it would be a misuse of his force, were he to do So : that he 
would thereby cease to be a truly virtuous man. So conversely, from the pro- 

1 [Dr Jackson having kindly read this of their common statement /j,rj avev dperTJs 

excursus as it was passing through the eivai TTJV fiiav. Further (2) he regards 

press remarks upon this last sentence, the two propositions contained in on 

that in his opinion this is precisely what rpoirov Tiva...dya6ov TIVOS as the cause 

these people do not appreciate and what but not the matter of the partial agree- 

Aristotle wishes to impress upon them, ment between (A) and (B): and he demurs 

viz. that virtue is the sole title to rule. (3) to the statement that the two views 

He objects (i) that the words on rpbirov simultaneously odaravTai and cTraXXdr- 

nj>a...u7repo%7; ayadov rivos are not to rovai, (4) to the sense given to d repot 

be taken as implying that the two \6yoi, and (5) to the vagueness in which 

parties have formulated their views in the whole passage is left, especially in 

this way, but as Aristotle s explanation the part about rd 

ON I. 6 i8. 207 

position virtue gives force the defenders of all slavery argue that might is 
right forgetting that it is not virtue alone that gives force, but that it must 
have favourable external circumstances ; when this is not the case the better 
man may easily succumb to the inferior. Aristotle might well assume this to 
be actually the reasoning employed by (B), for no other is logically conceivable. 
In regard to (A), the philosopher is not so certain whether they do thus far 
agree with (B) and with himself; whether they all really assume that, as a 
rule, virtue leads to victory. As therefore the sole right of virtue to rule 
became doubtful, he feels obliged to give an explicit justification of his course 
in attributing to them the argument above. This is because, if the point of 
contact between the two views is lost, and both stand opposed without any 
community, the views of (A), arepoi Xoyot, contain nothing tenable or con 
vincing, since they would yield this result that those who stand higher in 
mental and moral capacity do not deserve to be rulers and masters (eVfi 5m- 
(TTavTGdv ye ^copiy TOVTCOV TU>V Xoycov ovre tcr^t>poi> ovdev e^ovcriv ovre mdavov arepot 
Xoyot, cos ov SeT TO /3e Xrtov K.CLT dperrjv ap%eiv KCU 8e(nroeiv}. Postgate correctly 
remarks that it would have been clearer if Aristotle had written arepos \6yos 
for arepot Xoyot. 

Aristotle next passes to the view of a third party (C), agreeing in the 
practical result with that of (B), though not in the reason assigned, as its 
defenders simply (oXcoy to be taken with ai/rf^o/iei/ci) adhere to the principle 
"what is legal is right"; while even this result is restricted, because the 
principle is not allowed to apply to the case of non-Hellenes conquering Hel 
lenes, but only to that of Hellenes conquering non-Hellenes or to the relations 
of the non-Hellenes to one another. The view of (C) is thus essentially 
nothing else than the popular opinion current in Greece, involved in this 
inner contradiction ; and Aristotle shows that, in the main, his own coincides 
with it, since it maintains what is true in the popular opinion at the same 
time that it gets rid of its inconsistencies. For on Aristotle s theory also 
Greeks are, in the main, the natural rulers, barbarians the natural slaves, 
though this is a rule which certainly admits of many exceptions (see Introd. 

p. 25). SUSEMIHL. 

[Some salient features of Dr Jackson s interpretation may here be appended 
in his own words. He distinguishes three theories in 1255 a 7 26 : viz. 
i. that of (A) who argues that all slavery is unjust and unnatural, because 
violence is wrong ; ii. that of (B) who argues that all slavery is just and 
natural, because might is right ; iii. that of (C) who argues that all slavery is 
just and natural, because what is legal is just 1 : while Aristotle declares that 
in practice some slavery is just, some slavery unjust. "In 1255 a 12 21" 
he continues "Aristotle seeks to show that the positions of (A) and (B) are 
open to attack precisely in so far as they differ from his own. 

" Now the Xoyot of (A) and (B) 

i. All slavery is unjust 
ii. All slavery is just 

1 [Dr Jackson s notation X, Y, Z is here altered to (A), (B), and (C), for the 
sake of uniformity.] 


: i.e. slaveries which (A) pronounces unjust, (B) pronounces 
just. How is it, then, that these Xoyoi eVaXXarrouo-iv ? What is the reason 
of the controversy between (A) and (B) ? 

The reason is, Aristotle tells us, that, as dpe-nj with proper appliances is 
able to exert force or violence, while force or violence implies dyadov of some 
sort or other, (A) and (B) agree in assuming that where there is /3ta, there 
there is aperi;, and consequently suppose that they differ fundamentally in 
their notions of diicaiov. That is to say, on the assumption that /3ia is 
always accompanied by dptTij, (A), who conceives that in the cases which he 
has examined /3/a is detestable, and does not see anything to distinguish 
these cases from other cases, condemns all relations between inferior and 
superior which are not based upon loyalty , i.e. the willing obedience which 
an inferior renders to a kind and considerate superior ; while (B) who 
conceives that in the cases which he has examined /3ta is respectable, and 
does not see anything to distinguish these cases from other cases, takes as 
his principle might is right . 

When however the two theories are withdrawn within their proper limits, 
so that they Sieo-mo-i x m P^ an< ^ no longer eVaXXarrov<ri, the theory which (A) 
advances against (B) and the theory which (B) advances against (A), artpot 
Xoyoi, have neither force nor plausibility as against the modified doctrine <os 
Set TO fte\Tiov KCIT dpfrrjv ap^eif KGU 8e<r7roi>V ) 

He adds in a note : " In other words, so long as (A) maintains that All 
slavery is unjust, and (B) that All slavery is just, (B) has something io-xypov 
and iridavov to urge against (A), (A) has something larxvpov and TrtOavdv to 
urge against (B). But when (A) and (B) respectively fall back from their 
advanced and untenable positions to the position of Aristotle, (B) has no 
longer anything la-xvpov or Triflavov to urge against (A), (A) has no longer 
anything lo-xvpov or mdavov to urge against (B). It will be seen that I take 
TOVS Xoyov? and rcov \6yvv to be ( the theories of (A) and (B) , arepoi Xoyot 
to be { the theory adverse to (A s) theory and the theory adverse to (B s) 
theory , i.e. the theories of (B) and (A) ." He agrees with Heitland (Notes 
p. 11) that eVaXXarreiz; means primarily to overlap , whether by super 
position or by juxtaposition, and continues : " But when may propositions 
be said to overlap ? At first sight two cases suggest themselves : (i) All 
X is Y might be said to overlap Some X is F, and (2) Some X is Y and 
Some X is not Y might be said to overlap one another, provided that these 
subcontraries are incompatible. It appears however that eVaXXarretz/ marks 
not so much the transgression of a limit, as the invasion of a region beyond, 
and consequently that All X is Y could not be said to eVaXXarreii/ Some 
Xis Y. For this reason, as well as because eVoXXarrcti understood in the 
former of the two senses indicated above, would not find a proper antithesis 

1 Apart altogether from my doubts interest the unconditional supporters of 

whether the words of 4 (especially slavery, (B), have to contest the right of 

eTret, arepot, us ov 8ei as constructed with TO j34\Tioir KO.T dpeTrjv to rule at all, or 

iridavov) can grammatically bear the why they should seek to advance anything 

meaning which Dr Jackson here assigns possessing force and plausibility against 

to them, 1 fail to see what imaginable the modified doctrine. SuSEM. 

ON I. 6 i8. 209 

in 8ta<rrni/ra>i> x^P^j ^ take eVaAXarrety here in the latter of these senses, the 
whole field of slavery being a debatable ground which from opposite quarters 
(A) and (B) have overrun. With the phrase Staoroi/rwi/ xa>pi ?, which represents 
the relative position of (A) and (B) when they have withdrawn to their own 
sides of the field, compare the kindred use of /^copto-rat in /J.K i, 464 b 27. 
Thus while I agree with Heitland that overlap is the best English equiva 
lent for eVaXXarrft^, I demur to his unqualified statement that the latter 
word expresses the relation in which subcontraries stand to one another."] 

Bernays rendering of 6 3 5, 1255 a 12 24, mentioned in n. (51), is 
as follows (the words in italics being supplied by him to explain the 
connexion of thought). 

"The reason for the difference of opinions, and the common ground 
taken by the divergent views, is that to a certain extent intrinsic merit, when 
it attains external means, becomes also most competent to do violence, and 
every superior force depends upon the excess of some good quality or other, 
so that violence seems not to be devoid of all nobler elements and the 
difference of opinion therefore concerns the question of justice only. For the 
one side discovers justice in benevolent treatment, which precludes slavery; 
the others even hold it to be just that the stronger should rule. Whereas if 
the views stood harshly opposed to each other, so that merely external 
or brutal violence according to the one, and intrinsic merit according to the 
other, justified the claim to rule, then the view which impugns the right of 
the man, who is the better by his intrinsic merit, to be ruler and lord would 
be unable to adduce anything cogent or even plausible on its own behalf. 
Others however fasten wholly on an assumed empirical justice, such as the 
law, and declare slavery brought about by war to be just merely because the 
law sanctions it; yet in the same breath they are forced to admit that it is 


THE RELATION OF XP r ll JI - aTLa " rtK *] TO OiKOi>op.iKTJ : I. 8. 2. 

OTL piv ovv ovx r\ o.vrr\ rf olKOvo|uicfj r\ xP 1 H JLaTLCrTI K t i> 8T]\ov...-ir6Tpov 8e 

<TTI TL T] ^repov t8os, ^x t 8ia|A<JH<r|3t]TT]<riv. The most obvious course 
is to understand erepov efSos as only another expression for a mere auxiliary 
science (uTriyperncif), or at least as including the relation of an auxiliary 
science under the case that the two are wholly distinct. In this sense all 
the commentators take it ; both (i) those who think with Hampke see n. 
(67) on i. 8. i that Aristotle simply wished to set up as an auxiliary 
science just so much of ^p^arto-rt/o) as stands in a natural relation to OIKO- 
?7, an( i consequently in c. 8 13 would set matters right by omitting 
, so that the direct branch of xP T ll JiaTta " riK *l * s not there said to ; be 
a part of, but only to belong to , OI KOI/O/LUKT/, as that with which it is 
concerned : and (2) those who with Biichsenschiitz rely on the received text 

H. 14 


of 8 $ 13 and maintain Aristotle s decision to be this : that the direct branch 
of xp^arto-rtK?) is really a part of OLKOVO^KTJ, but that the natural part of 
indirect xpij/narioriKj), t ^ ie tneor y f exchange, is, on the contrary, merely 
an auxiliary science. Now there is no passage in which Aristotle makes 
even the slightest allusion to such a difference in the relation of the two to 
olKovofjLiKij. But he states explicitly that not until c. 10 does he proceed to 
give a definite answer to the question proposed in c. 8 i, viz. how that 
branch of xpT/^arioriKJj, with which the householder is concerned, is related 
to oiKovofjuitq ; the answer being that it is in one respect a part of OIKOVO/ZI/O/, 
in another respect an auxiliary science, 10 I -3. The matter cannot 
therefore have been previously decided. And yet he had just said that 
has to do with the use or consumption of commodities, XPW* 1 
r) with their production, and that hence the two are heterogeneous, 
because consumption and production are not the same thing. Now, as 
Schiitz remarks, this necessarily implies that for the same reason even the 
branch of xp^ario-rt/o) most closely allied to OIKOI/O/MK^ cannot be a part of it 
except ina restricted and relative sense 1 . This again is decisively confirmed 
by Aristotle s requirement, iv(vn). 9 3, 4, 7, 18 ; 10 9 14, that while 
none but landowners are to be citizens and none but citizens landowners, 
they shall not themselves carry on agriculture or cultivate their own estates, 
since in this way even agriculture really ceases, strictly speaking, to be a 
distinctive part of household management or domestic economy. Yet on 
another side the connexion still remains so close that Aristotle can distin 
guish between the functions of husband and wife in housekeeping by saying 
ill. 4. 17 11. (496), that the one has to acquire, the other to keep ; in other 
words that the external management of the property is more appropriate to 
the husband, the internal management to the wife. From all this it follows 
that erfpov eldos denotes something which is not connected with olKovo/juKrj 
either as a part of it, or simply as an auxiliary to it : the more subtle distinc 
tion between branch and subsidiary science is, for the present, to remain 
undecided ; and p.epos is used in a vaguer sense, even covering the case of an 
auxiliary science, this being also true of 10 i, so that there is certainly no 
need to expunge the word there. Such instances of inexactness and care 
less expression frequently obscure Aristotle s meaning ; but in this part of the 
work they are unusually numerous. Thus xp^tmcmK?) has three meanings, 
(l) = KTr)TiKij, in the widest sense; 3 3 and c. 8 : and, in a narrower sense, 
(2)=)Mera/3A?7TiKi7 or KanrjXLKij , rj p,rj avayKaia of 9 1 8 (so from c. 9 I 
onwards); and again (3) r\ avayKaia, rj Kara (pvo-iv, 9 12, c. 10 (cp. H. on 8 i). 
Several times only accurate observation of the context can determine which 
of the three senses the word has. Similarly /xera/SA^Tt/c?) or ^era/SoAtK?) as a 
general term for exchange includes under it both the natural and unnatural 
species of indirect acquisition, both that which comes under oiKoi/o/xt/cr) and 

1 If Buchsenschiitz had definitely put in the negative. To acquire and to spend, 

the question to himself, whether acquir- or consume, are really opposed; which is 

ing can be a branch of using and con- what Aristotle says briefly, but to my 

suming he would no doubt have answered thinking quite clearly. 

ON I. 8. 2. 211 

that which is alien to it : but sometimes it is found in the narrower accepta 
tion of retail trade proper, Kcnr^XtK?/, as in 9 12, 10 4, u 3. Teichmiiller 
has some good remarks on the want of a strict terminology in Aristotle 
Arist. Forschungen n. 4 ff. 

Besides, to ask whether xprj/zano-rifo) is a part of OIKOVO/JLLKIJ, is, as Oncken 
has pointed out 1 , a perverse way of raising the question. For x/^/zanorue^, 
conversely, has a wider field than OIKOI/O/LUKT; : even the finances of the state 
and the labour of the whole society of the citizens are intimately concerned 
in it, and the earnings which supply the wants of single households form 
only an important part of this sum total of the national income. Aristotle 
finds himself accordingly compelled to speak of a xP r IP- aTi0 " rLK -^ (& X 3 15 ; 
ii 13) which is not simply for the householder and the family circle, but for 
statesmen and the commonwealth. At the same time he is so inconsistent 
as to designate the accumulation of a stock of commodities or possessions 
which shall be useful for civil society, whether it be by direct production or 
by plunder, a branch or a concern of otKovopucij 2 . Cp. the notes on 8 
13 J 5> and on u 13. SUSEM. (69) 


The difficulty pointed out in notes (45) and (121) on 5 9 and 13 12, 
may perhaps be removed as follows. If the slave by nature is to be altogether 
without that lower part of reason, which Aristotle here calls TO fiovXevriKov, he 
would be without reason altogether ; for still less can he be said to have the 
higher part, TO eVto-TTj/uoi/tKoV, scientific thought. But then he would quite cease 
to be a human being. The expression oXcos OVK e^et TO ftovXevriKov, 13 7, 
should therefore be taken as hyperbolical and interpreted in the light of that 
other, and itself hyperbolical, statement KOIVWWV \oyov TOO-OVTOV ocrov 
alo-OdvearOai dXXd pr\ t\tiv 5 9: reason is present in the slave only, so 
to speak, as a dwapis, not as a Zgts ; and Aristotle avails himself of the 

1 Staatslehre ii. 81 : "It is just like nance of the household the means, which 

putting the question : Is the universal the the other science indicates." It must he 

same as the particular, or a part of it, or observed in reply to this, (a) that only the 

a distinct species? For that xp r n/ JLaTiffTI - K ^ smaller and less essential branch of oko- 

has the wider generality and that Q LKO- VO/JLIKTJ in Aristotle s sense has this func- 

vofjuKj] is the particular, is evident. We tion, 13 i, (b) that as it has to do with 

should have expected to hear, what xpry- consumption, while xptyjuarumff^ is con- 

jtcmcm/a? is in itself, what comes under cerned with acquisition, even this branch 

it, and then the relation of OIKOVOIJUKT] to of oiKovofJuKr) is not related to 

it would have followed of itself and have rtcm/CT? simply as particular to universal. 
been arrived at very simply. Whereas 2 Schiitz alone saw this difficulty and 

by adopting the opposite" (?) " procedure, vainly tried to get over it by the omission 

we can only with difficulty surmise that of /ecu TTO\ITIKUV and /ecu rot s TroXm/fcus, 

Xpwcmcm/cT? is undoubtedly an indepen- 8 15. He failed to see that it was also 

dent branch of science, treating quite necessary to reject TroXews r) in 8 13 sub 

generally of the means to acquire pro- fincm, that these words indeed must be 

perty and increase wealth ; that ot/co- the first to go. 
vojj.LK.ri teaches us to apply to the mainte- 


212 NOTE ON I. 13. 12. 

hyperbole ^ e^etv to denote that only the indispensable, or roughly speaking 
insignificant, minimum of rational deliberation, and therefore of reason 
generally, is found in such men. It is precisely similar with c. 6 of the 
Poetics, where first of all 9, 1450 a 7, characters (rjdrj} are said to form a part 
of every tragedy, and then a little farther on 14, a 23, we read avev p.ev 
Trpa^ecoj OVK av yevoiTO rpaywSta, avfv Se ydcov yeVoir civ. at yap TCOV vecov rutv 
TrXeurrcoy d^Oeis rpaycoSiai etcrti/ KOI o\cos TTOL^TOL TroXXoi TOLOVTOL. Comp. 
Hermes XIX. 1884, p. 592. SUSEM. Plato too, Rep. IV. 441 A, says \oyio-p.ov 
8 CVLOL p.v ep-oiye doKovaiv ouSeVore p.fTa\ap.[3dveiv, ol 8e TroXXot o^e rrore. Taken 
strictly this would deny to children and many adults the possession, as well 
as the use, of reason. 

NOTE ON I. 2 13 : 1253 a 20 24. 

clvcupovfjievov "yap TOV oXov OVK &TTCU TTOVS ov8l X ^P? ^^ H 11 ! OJACOVVJJLWS. wtrirep ei 
TIS Xe^yti TT]V Xi6iVT)v 8ia<|>0apeia a ya.p ^crrai TOiavTT], iravra 8e (? yap) TW ^p-yaj 
copwrTcu Kal TT^ 8vvci[JLi, wcrre fXT|KTt TOiavra ovra oi XCKTCOV rot CVUTO, elvai dXX 
6fxwvu|xa. The words of n. (28) p. 150 " if Toiavrr] = B. true hand " will admit of 
further elucidation. Scholl, who maintains this to be the meaning of roiavrrj, 
tails qualis esse debet vera maims (Susem. Quacst. Crit. IV. p. 5), cites as 
analogous the use of rotovro? in De part, animal. I. i 25, 26, 640 b 33 ; 
Kairoi Kal o TfQve&s e^et TTJV avrrjv TOV cr^^aros fiop<ptjv, dXX o/xcoy OVK 
av 6 POTTOS, eri 6 adiivarov flvai x ^P a < TT]V> OTTUXTOVV dia.KfifJii>r)v, olov 
Tj v\ivr)v, TrXrjv op.c0vvp.cos, ooVyrep TOV yeypap,p,evov laTpov. ov yap 8wij(TfTai 
Troielv TO eavriys- epyov, cocrTrep ovd* av\ol \idivoi TO eavTtov epyov, ouS o yfypap,- 
p,evos laTpos. 6p.oicos $e TOVTOLS ovSe TWV TOV TeOvnKOTOs [JLOptwv ovSev ^TI TWV 
TOIOVTWV eo-TL, Xeyco S olov o(p6a\p.6s, x ei/ P (where Scholl has himself added 
TT/V}. The citation is the more apposite because Scholl takes diacpdapelaa ^eip 
to mean precisely TOV Tedv^KoTos x ei p> manus corporis extincti, dvaipovp,cvov 
TOV 6 Xou, quae propter hanc solam causam simul corrupta est appellanda. 

There is however another suggestion. Even granting that, as Scholl 
contends, SiafpOaptlo-a is subject and ToiavTr) predicate, and that dia^Qapelaa 
means a dead man s hand, may not ToiavTij mean simply homonymous/ a 
hand in much the same sense as a hand of stone ? Thus explained eVrat 
ToiavTT) is parallel to ov Xexreoi/ ra avTa aXX 6p,covvp.a, there is no need to 
insert OVK, and ndvTa yap (which the best MSS. of the old translation attest), 
is a distinct improvement upon ndvTa de. So in effect Vettori p. 14 (ed. 
of 1576) : "posset enim, inquit, aliquis manum vocare e lapide formatam, 
quae tamen manus non esse perspicitur : neque enim fungitur munere 
manus. manus vero hominis mortui talis profecto est." 


260 b 27 eVet [Se] 7rpoaipoi>/j,0a Oewprjcrai irepl rfjs KOLVWVLCLS TV;? (I) 
7ro\iTiKrj<?, T/5 Kparidrrj iracr&v rot? Svvafievois "Cfiv on //,- 
\KTTCL Kar evfflv, Set /ou T? aXXa? iiTKTK^cKjQai TTO\L- (P. 23) 
30 re/a?, at? re ^pwvrai lives TW^ troXewv rcSi/ evvofj-elcrOai 
\eyo/jiei>wv, real el nves erepau rvy^avovcriv VTTO TLVWV elprj- 
Kai BoKovcrat, /caXw? eetv tva TO r oOcos eov 

1260 b 27 Se omitted by II 1 Ar., and ydp would make a better transition. See 
Intr. p. 14, n. 3 || 28 TLS II 1 and P 4 (corr. in the margin over an erasure), 17 II- 
Bk. P 4 (ist hand) || 31 K&V P 1 II- Bk. (perhaps rightly) [ rvyxavovaiv P 3 (ist hand) 
and perhaps T, Tvyx&vwaiv M s P 1 - 4 C 4 Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. 1 and a later hand in P 3 |j 
Schneider, but see Dittenberger op. c. p. i36Sf. || 32 T omitted by M s P 1 

10 13, ii i, 12 9, 13 9 ; vi(iv). 

11 i with notes. SUSEM. (128) 

In Plato evxats ofj.oLo.--a chimerical 
scheme, e.g. Rep. 456 C, OVK dpa ddvvard 
ye ovde circus 6fJ.ota evofj.o6erovfj.ev, 499 c, 
5LKaius dv Ka.Taye\(fJ.e6a, cus d XXws 
6 fJt.oLa \eyovres ; and in 540 D fj.r] 
(IprjKevaL is explained by dXXct 
/J.6V, di vard dt irrj. Thus evxv = ^n ideal, 
something visionary, impracticable, as in 
Demosth. c. Timocr. 722, 19, el yap au 
/caXcDs fj.ev e xoi i ^ SVVOLTOV 5e ri (fipdfoL, 
evxys ov v6fj.ov dLcnrpdrTOLT dv epyoi . 
Similarly optare in Latin. By i)v yudXtcrra 
/car ei>x^ Aristotle implies that no re 
strictions are placed on the realization of 
the scheme by circumstances. 

30 rives TWV iroXecov] See iv(vn). 
14! 15 n. SUSEM. (128 b) 

vvo(iet<r0ai Xe-yoiie vwv] e.g. by the his 
torical Socrates Xen. Mem. m. 5. 15, iv. 
4. 15: Plato Crito 52 E, Ps.- Plato Minos 
320 B. Add Nic. Eth. i. 13. 3. 

32 tva KrX] in order to note what 
they have of right and useful, and to show 
that it is from no love of ingenious specu 
lation at all hazards (as the search for 
some new form of polity, distinct from 
these, might seem to imply) but from the 

Book II is the critical portion of the 
work, just as an examination of preceding 
theories serves for an introduction to other 
Aristotelian treatises, Metaphysics Physics 
Psychology &c. Here cc. 1 8 deal with 
Political Thinkers, cc. 912 with Exist 
ing Constitutions. See Introd. p. 32. 

c. i Our object is to discover the best 
scheme of political society. We must there 
fore examine in detail the best existing 
forms of government and the theories of 
our predecessors : i. 

first of all, should the community 
which in some measure is implied in every 
city ( 2) extend to wives and children and 
to property, as in Plato s Republic? 3. 

1 1260 b 27 -rrpoa.ipovip.e0a ] This 
is evidence (as against Gottling Preface p. 
xviii, and others) that Aristotle intended 
to construct an ideal state : see Spengel 
Ueber die Politik p. u, and compare iv 
(vu). 13. 4 . 

KoivwvCas THS iroX.] This takes us 
back to i. i i . The imperfect associa 
tions whose relation to civil society, ij 
TroXiTiKY) KOLV., was the preliminary pro 
blem, have been dealt with in B. i. 

29 KO.T cvxtjv] For this expression see 
6 7 n. (202); iv(vn). 4 i, 2, 5 3, 








[II 1. 1 

TI Trap avTas eTepov JJLTJ (I) 
{3ov\opevcov, d\\d Sid TO /JLTJ 
*ud TOVTO 


TrpwTov iroiriTeov, r] rrep 7re(f)VKV dp^r) TavTrjs 
avayKT] yap ^TOL TravTas TTCLVTWV KOivwvelv TOU? 
?, rj TIVCOV fiev TIVWV Se fj,rj. TO p,ev ovv yLt^Se^o? 

tcoivcovla rt? 
yap TOTTO? et? 




roi)? TroXtra? 
/ce1 yup o 


40 KOivwveiv fyavepov GO? O^VVCLTOV (rj yap TToXiTela 
earl, Kal TTpwrov dvay/crj TOV TOTTOV Kowwvelv o 

1261 a 6 T7/9 [Jilds TToXeO)?, Oi )6 TToXlTdl KOlVCOVol 

3 d\\d TTorepov oawv 

KOU wvelv TI]V fjL6\\ov(rav olfcr}(TO 0a(, 

fjiev TLVWV Se ov (Be\Tiov ; e^Se^ero-i ydp /cal 
5 yvvaiKwv Kal KTTjfjidTwv Koivwvelv 

waTrep ev Trj TroXtre/o- Tfj nXarco^ 

33 rt P 1 , omitted by F M s , hence [TI] Susem. 1 , perhaps rightly || 36 eiripa- 
\ecrdaL n- Ek. (perhaps rightly) || 40 TroXireta IT, TroXts Susem. 1 - 2 Ar. (?) and T (?), 
civitas William || 41 rou TOTTOU after Koivwvtiv M 8 ? 1 || ets 6 TTJS F, tVorT/s H 
Ar. || 

1261 a 2 a\\a...b 15 alpeTcorepov. Eubulos, in Angela Mai s Script, vet. nov. coll. 
} r at. ii. p. 671 sqq., attempts to refute this passage || oaov M s C 4 Q b T b |j 
omitted by F, {TT&VT uv\ Susem. 1 but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1363^ || 6 
os TroXtraa ]\l s F 1 , TroXtret a TOV irXdruvos Q b U b W b L 8 Aid. 

defectiveness of all schemes hitherto 
framed that we have undertaken this in 

34 (ro4>Le(r0ai = affect wisdom, show 
one s cleverness, whence <ro0tcrT??s. Else 
where in the treatise simply to devise, 
5 19, vijiy). 13. i, vn(vi). 14. 19. 

36 empdXXco-Ocu] Shilleto compares 
Thuc. vi. 40, Plato A>///. 264 B, Tim. 
48 c, Zr?7cv x. 892 D, for this sense to 
take up. 

2 37 TJ irep irt ^vKev] The natural 
beginning, seeing that every state is a 
form of association, KOLVUVLCL, I. i. i 
(Eaton). SUSEM. (129) 

38 TI TOL iravras irdvTWv KT\] The 
same alternatives are given iv(vii). 8 8 
-9 2. 

41 TOV T^TTOV] The converse is not 
universally true. Mere contiguity of resi 
dence is not enough to constitute citizen 
ship : in. i 3, 9 9. Note here the idea 
of territory in the germ. 

3 1261 a 3 o iKiio-(r0ai] Eaton 
proposes a reflexive sense, "direct itself 

aright," comparing Thuc. VI. 18 T-TJV TTO\LV 
Tpi^effdac avTi^v Trepl avTyv and other 

6 eKi] Rep. iv 423 E f. v 449 C 
466 D. This passage and v(vni). 7. 9 
justify the inference that 6 2&>KpaTt]s with 
the article v(vin). /. 9, means through 
out 6 ev Trj TroXirei^t 2., Socrates, the 
character in the Platonic dialogue, in 
keeping with Aristotle s cautious manner 
of referring controversially to contem 
porary thought. Not directly named, as a 
rule, Plato lurks under Socrates (cp. nn. 
116, 199), as under TII^S, TIS r&v irpoTepov, 
and the like. See Campbell s apt remarks 
on similar reticence in Plato, Introd. to 
TJieactetus p. xxxiv, ed. 2. 

cc. 25 An Examination of Plato s 

c. 2 Communism would not secure 
Plato s end, which is the utmost possible 
imity. Excessive tinification subverts the 
city, reducing it to a family or an indi 
vidual : i, 2. The elements of the 
city are dissimilar, and thus it is differen- 

II 2. 1] 

1260 b 33 1261 a 13. 


Kal T? (I) 

$LV Koiva ra refcva real r<7? yvvalicas elvai 

rovro Srj rrorepov tw? vvv OVTW f3e\,riov e^ew, TJ 
Kara rov ev rfj rrdKireia <ye<ypa[j,/j,evov VOJJLOV ; 

2 ^X l/ ^ Bvcr^epeLas aXXa? re TroXXa? TO rrdvrwv elvai ra? 3 
n yvvaiKas KQivas, /cal $i rjv air lav <^7]al iv vevofJio9err)o-6ai rov 
rporrov rovrov 6 ^WKpar^, ov fyaiverai av^fBalvov GK rwv \6 r ywv. 
en 8e rrpbs, TO TeXo? o (frrjcri, rfj TroXet Setv vrrdp^eiv, w? fjiev 

10 <?x L --- 1269a 27 8icuj>opcxv noticed by Mich, of Ephesus op. c. f. 188 b H STJ T P 1 
II 2 , perhaps rightly || n KOIVO.S </ccu TKVO,> Spengel || 13 TI 8e irpos, TO Bernays, 
cp. TOffovTov yap /cat ^rt irpos, DC SopJi. Elcnch. 4 7, 166 a 34 f. : TI 5^ [Trpos] rb 
Susem. 1 2 3 , tracing it to a variant wpbs de TOVTOIS of ?ri 5e : yet the punctuation 
?r/)6s ro rAos with Thurot s construction ("as regards the end," making us ^v 
eiprjTai vvv subject to adiivarov) is not impossible : trpbs o reXos (f>-r}ffl Busse 

tiated from an offensive and defensive 
alliance (cru/x/xaxta) and a race or tribe 
(tdvos) : 3. It is this which makes reci 
procity the political safeguard, 4, allowing 
the citizens to become alternately rulers 
and subjects, although a permanent govern 
ing body would be better, 5, 6; allowing 
also a change of functions among the offi 
cials. 7. further, the greater independ 
ence (aurdp/ceta) secured in t/ie city essen 
tially defends upon a degree of unity 
Icnver than that of the family, 8. 

See Grote s Plato c. 35, in. pp. 160 
242, Oncken I. 171 193 and various 
monographs quoted in the In trod. p. 
32 n. 4, p. 33 11. 7. The main defects 
of this criticism are at once apparent ; 
Zeller, Platonic Studies p. 203, 290, has 
rightly traced them to an excessive 
striving after logical clearness ; a tendency 
to reduce the Platonic utterances to a 
number of precise dogmatic propositions 
and to test the independent validity of 
each empirically, without regard to its 
inner connexion with the whole system of 
idealism. Hence it comes about that the 
spirit of the Platonic teaching is hardly 
ever adequately appreciated, while now 
and then there is a captious, almost pe 
dantic, disposition to get at external 
results and to fasten on details with but 
little insight into their true relative im 
portance. " Several objections urged by 
him turn more upon the Platonic lan 
guage than upon the Platonic vein of 
thought, and if judged by Plato from his 
own point of view would have appeared 
admissions in his favour rather than objec 
tions " (Grote). This is the sober fact, 
and serves to account for the piquant 
charges of injustice, sophistry, and mala 

fides sometimes brought against Aristotle. 

1 10 irdvrwv and 11 Koivds are un 
intentional misrepresentations of the kind 
just criticized. The marriage laws in 
question affect only Plato s Guardians, 
and do not establish community of wives 
at all, in the strictly literal and unfavour 
able sense of the term (which would 
be a gross libel, we are told, on the philo 
sopher who made marriage, so to speak, 
a sacrament ). Indeed they seem to aim 
at an impossible strictness, hardly less 
exacting than vows of celibacy (Zeller 
Plato p. 489 Eng. tr. ). And this must 
have been Aristotle s judgment: he never 
attacks them on the score of license, but 
only on grounds of public expediency. 
Moreover the aim of these laws and the 
arguments by which they are defended 
are such as to lay them open to the 
inexact and invidious appellation even 
at the hands of impartial modern critics. 
See e.g. Dr Jowett s remarks Plato ill. 
p. i6off. 

ii Si rjv atTiav = ctma 8C T\V "that 
which he assigns as the reason why 
such legislation is necessary does not ap 
pear to result from his proposals " : crv/j.- 
fBaivov following as if TOVTO 5i o had pre 
ceded. In 4 5 is a similar attraction. 
The reason in question is the funda 
mental assumption of the Platonic state 
that the utmost possible unity is desir 
able : communism, within certain limits, 
is a means to this unity. 

13 Thurot would translate: "further 
in view of the end which he says ought to 
be set before the city his present statement 
(of his scheme) is impracticable." But it 
is simpler to take rAos as subject ; 7r/o6s 
may be adverbial (see Crit. Notes] : " the 

216 nOAITIKHN B. 2. [IT. 2. 1 

e ipr}Tai vvv, dovvarov, TTOJ? oe Sel SteXetz^, ovSev ^iwpLcrrai. (I) 
2 Xe7&) Be TO fjiiav elvai TYJV 7ro\iv w? apia-rov ov OTL paXicrra 
16 Trdcrav ^ajjufidvei jap ravr rjp vnrbQecriv 6 SftJ/epar???. 

Kairoi (ftavepov ecrriv ok Trpolovcra KOI yivo^evri fjiia /.id\- 4 
~kov ovSe 7roXt9 ecrrai TrX^o? 7ap TL rrjv fyvcnv ecrrlv r) TroXt?, 
yivofjievri re fJiia i^d\\ov ol/cla fj,ev etc Tro Xeo)? dv9pa)7ros o e 
20 oiKias ecrrai /md\\ov yap fjbiav rrjv ol/clav. rrjs TroXew? fyairi^ev (p. 24) 

a^, /cal TOZ^ em r^9 olfclas U>O~T el /cal Swaro? rt? eirj rovro 
3 S^ttz^, ov TrotrjTeov dvaip^crei yap rr)V vroKiv. ov povov 8 etc 
dvOptoTTwv ecrrlv rf TroXt?, aXX KCLL e etSe/. $ia- 
ov yap yiverai TroXt? e f ofjioiwv. erepov yap 

14 etptjrai] SiypijTai Zwinger || Set omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, inserted 
by corr. 1 ) || 5teA#etz> AI S P 2 3 C 4 Q b T b , elireiv ? Susem. || 1 5 6V omitted by II 2 Bk. 
and the ist hand of P 4 (inserted between the lines and by a later hand in the margin) 
II 1 6 Tracrav before 15 o! s d ptcrrov II 2 Bk. (in P 4 corrected by a later hand in the mar 
gin) 11 18 ou5e] ov AIT 1 || ij omitted by MT 1 ; hence [77] Susem. 1 2 || 21 eW 
<[AaX\ov eVa>? Riese, needlessly || /cat after et omitted by P M s , [/cat] Susem. 1 ; 
notwithstanding Dittenberger s protest, op. c. p. 1361, /cat is not indispensable, see in. 
16 9, 1287 b 6 I! 22 5 e/c II 2 , e/c omitted by II 1 , <5e [e/c] Susem. 1 2 , perhaps rightly || 
23 et c)et] et Sous C 4 Q b T b , eideiovs P 6 U b , in P 4 the word stands over an erasure 

end as there stated by Plato is impossible The discussions in this book supply the 

(to attain)." For vvv^in the case sup- further relation that the maintenance of 

posed, see 3 ?, 8 TO : vvv <5 (on the the state itself is conditioned by the 

scheme of Hippodamos) Idiav exovcriv. maintenance of the family. SUSEM. 

14 8iXeiv = analyse, define (by ana- (131) 

lysis), more nearly determine : ill. 13 6, 3 The state is an organized unity. 

14 2, DC gen. ct corr. I. i. i rets re The plurality of parts which it contains 

airias diaipereov . are specifically distinct and properly sub- 

2 1 6 Xafj.f3avei -y<xp KT\] Rep. iv ordinated. This however is one distinc- 

422 D f., 423 I) f.; v 449 P, f., 462. The tive thought of the Republic, the ground 

three general positions which Aristotle of Plato s analogy between the state and 

takes up against Plato in i, 2 are the individual. 

treated in reverse order in the sequel. 24 ov "yap...!! OJJLOIWV] Apparently 

The third, " the end is impracticable" in contradicted by in. 8 4, 16 2, vi(iv). 

c. 2; then the second, "the means are n 8; but there equality of rights is 

unsuitable" in cc. 3, 4, 5 i 13: intended by 6/zotW (Eaton). The pre- 

lastly, "the many other difficulties" in sent statement is repeated in. 4. 5 where 

c. 5 14 28 (Thurot). Comp. Analysis uniformity of moral excellence is dis- 

pp. 102, 103. SUSEM. (130) claimed : here the sense is similarity of 

17 fua p.dXXov] too much of a unity. functions (Postgate), as is illustrated by 

1 8 irXTjGos "yap TL] See 5 15, III. i ^V. Eth. V. 5. 9, ov yap e/c dvo iarpdov 
2, 12. yiverai. /cot^w^ta, dXX e iarpov /cat yewp- 

22 ov n-OLT]Tov... < 7r6Xiv] With these 701), /cat 6 Xws erepwj/ /cat oik ivwv dXXa 

words the polemic against Plato i;; re- TOVTOVS Set l<ra<rdv}v<u. It is the basis of 

sumed exactly where it had started at the the arrangements proposed Pol. iv(vn) 

commencement of the work, I. i. 2 cp. cc. 8, 9. See on I. 7. i n. (58 b). 
note (2 b) and Introd. p. 23, i.e. with the <rv[A[Jiax>a] A confederation is a dif- 

specific difference between a state and a ferent thing from a state : see ill. 3 5, 

family; and this point of view is retained 9 7, 10. It is not an organism but an 

in 1> 8? 3 4~4 IO > 5 H 2 4- aggregate of homogeneous members. The 

II 2. 4] 

1261 a 14 12G1 a 30. 


25 fJia^la Kal TroTu? TO 
TO auTo TCO el 
rcev), wGirep av el 

Kal TroXt? eOvovs, OTdv fir) Kara 
TO 7r\rj0os, aXV otoi^ Ap/caSe?) 
i, eibei $ia<f)epei,. SioTrep TO icrov TO 

yap TW TTOOTW %prj(ri,fJLov, Kav y (I) 
yap X a P LV V ffVfifia%la rrefyv- 
TrKelov e^Kvaet ($LOLO-I Se TOO 5 

W<JL Ke^wpi- 
wv 8e Set ev 

26 TtD (T< P 4 ) auTcD P 4 C 4 Q b T b U b || 27 e\Kv<r-r) II 2 Bk., e\KV<rr] M 8 || Sioiaei... 
transposed by Susem. 1 to come before ctXXa irbrepov 1261 a 2, but wrongly || 
28 Kal TnSXts] TroXts Kal ? Susem. || 29 dXX ] TrdXcu Schneider, [dXX ] Schlosser Garve 
|| Ap/cd<5es * * Coming, olov <vvi Riese; but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1376 ff. and 
the Comm. below || 30 yivevBai ? Susem. || eidei <5et> Siacptpeiv Biicheler (pro 
bably right), eidei 8ia<f>pei.i> M s 

limiting clause, which excludes from the 
comparison the cases where the people 
live Kara /cw^as and opposes to the city- 
state only such races as the Arcadian. 

29 ApKciSes] Who are meant? The 
interpretation of the passage turns upon 
this. When Plato, Synip. 193 A, writes 
Sup KLff dr/fj^e v I Tro Geou Kadairtp Ap/ca5es 
VTTO A.aKedaifji,oi>t(i)v the words spaced 
show that the Mantineans are meant. 
Demosthenes Or. XVI uses ApKcides nine 
times and Me7aXo7roX?Tcu seven times of 
the same people whose city was entitled 
in full f/ /meyaXr/ TroXts T&V ApKadwv. 
There everything is clear from the inter 
change of terms. But if the words "when 
they live like the Arcadians" indicate an 
edvos so well known as to spare Aristotle 
further explanation the instance chosen 
ought, as Dittenberger urges, to be before 
all things perspicuous. Understand then 
neither the Mantineans with Schneider, 
nor the Megalopolitans with Camerarius, 
nor with Giphanius the Maenalians and 
Parrhasians in the southwest before the 
founding of Megalopolis ; none of these 
exclusively; but the entire population of 
Arcadia, as the word naturally means. 
See Note on Arcadia at the end of B. 1 1. 

"Further compare I. 2 4 n. (n), 6 
(19): in. 13. 19 (607); iv(vn). 4. ii 
(760)." SUSEM. (132) 

e c5v 8e Sei] Whereas (in the case of 
the city-state) the elements which must 
coalesce into one are (? must be, see Crit. 
Notes] specifically distinct. So that it 
would not make a single city, in. 3 5, 
9 9, to join by an external tie two such 
similar units as the civic body of Corinth 
and that of Megara: the conditions for 
reciprocity would be wanting. 

4 30 TO IVov TO dvTt/TTirov0os] 
Not equal retribution but the propor- 

separate autonomous states, the Lacedae 
monians and their allies, for example, 
are homogeneous. 

2 ^ TO \ikv answered by 29 e w^ 5e. The 
one (the alliance for war) will be of ad 
vantage from its mere size however 
much alike in kind, just as (it will be of 
advantage) if a weight shall pull more 
(than another): i.e. like a heavier weight 
which turns the scale. The more mem 
bers the stronger the alliance. 

27 Siourei KT\] " Upon something 
similar", the character of the constituents, 
whether heterogeneous (so as to allow of 
reciprocity) or homogeneous, "will de 
pend the difference also between a city 
and a race, provided the race does not 
live with its population separated over a 
number of villages, but like the Arca 
dians." Not observing the parenthesis 
and taking orav /mr) win /ce^wp. as epexe- 
getical of TW TOIOVTU the editors have 
referred this remark to the process of 
<rvvoLKL(T/ui6s, the change from village life 
by which a Greek ZOvos was consolidated 
into one city. But (i) the Arcadians 
must surely be cited as an example of a 
race and not (as they would be upon 
that view) of a city : (2) this is riot a dis 
tinction between Zdvos and TroXis univer 
sally, but between one edvos and another. 

(3) We should then expect //Tj/c^rt, or 
o!oi <:i ui >or something equivalent : and 
the exact force of the future and of TOJ 
TOIOVTW (not TOVTU) would be missed. 

(4) In that case Arcadians means sim 
ply Megalopolitans, whereas Tegeatans, 
Mantineans and others might equally 
claim to belong to the Arcadian league 
(TO ApKadiKov). Hence Dittenberger, in 
Gott. gel. Anzcigen 1874 P- I 38 J re 
jects the supposed reference to avvoi- 

and takes orav M KT\ as a 


31 (TW^ei T<79 


W(77Tp l> TO?? 

[II. 2. 4 


tional adjustment of claims, i.e. reci 
procity of services and functions. 

"As reciprocal proportion regulates 
the exchange of different wares in Nic. 
Eth. \ 5, so here it regulates the relations 
between the magistrate for the time being 
and the ordinary citizen, who render, the 
one service, the other TL/ULTJ /cat yepas Nic. 
Eth. v 6 7, 1134 b 7. On the applica 
tion of the principle of dvTiTreirovObs /car 
ava\oyiav, reciprocal proportion , to 
commerce, friendship, and exchange 
generally, see my edition of the Fifth 
Book of the Ethics p. 88 ff. In A T ic. Eth. 
v r 6, 1 132 b 32 it is dvTLireTTovdbs /car 
di aXoytaz /cat fj.r, /car t crorTjra, i.e. recip 
rocal proportion as opposed to the re 
taliation of the Pythagoreans, which is 
said to hold the TroXts together. The 
inconsistency is however only apparent. 
Here, where it is not necessary to em 
phasize the distinction between dvTiire- 
Trovdos /car dva\oyiai>, i.e. /car tcrorTjra 
\6ywv, and dvT weir ov 66s /car t <roV??ra, i.e. 
/car tcror^ra aTrXcos, TO laov TO avTLireirov- 
06s is the equivalent of dvTnreTrovOos /car 
dvaXoyiav in the other passage. By a 
similar inexactitude in Nic. Eth. ix i i, 
1163 b 33 geometrical proportion takes 
the place of reciprocal proportion as the 
rule of exchange. Just so, although TO 
a,7rX<2>$ oiKaLov is TO /car d^iav VIIl(v) I, 
1301 b 37, at vn(vi) 2 2, 1317 b 3 r6 
Sixaiov TO O-^IJ-OTLKCV is said to consist in rb 
LVOV ^X IV KaT dpt.d/Jioi> dXXa JJ.TI /car d^iav, 
TO /car d^iav in the former passage in 
cluding, and in the latter excluding, TO 
/car dpi.dp.Qv laov. See my notes on Nic. 
Eth. v 3 7." JACKSON. 

From the apparent inconsistency Grant 
inferred, Ethics I. p. 52 f., that the remarks 
on Retaliation in the Ethics are a de 
velopment and improvement of those in 
the Politics. The common source may 
be Plato s Atos Kpiais, the true TTO\LTIKOV 
St/cato^, of Laws VI 757 B, C: ry fj.ev yap 
fj.ei^ovL TrXet w raj 5 eXdrroi t ayxt/cporepa 
i^/xet, /x^rpta StSoucra irpos Trjv OLVTWV (fivaiv 
f/car^pw, /cat dr) /cat rt/xds /xetfocri uei irpbs 
dpeTrjv del /meifovs KT\. 

31 Iv TOIS TJOiKois] A^V. Eth. v. 5. 6, 
where from the nature of the case and 
the explanations given TO dvTnreTrovdus is 
not to be understood negatively of retalia 
tion for evil suffered, but positively as a 
recompense for good received. (As there 
explained the one, retaliation, repays like 
with like ; the other makes requital by 
the corresponding term in reciprocal pro- 

portion : for in reference to his demand 
the builder is to shoes as the shoemaker 
to the house.) More precisely thus : of 
the different members of a community A 
transfers to B the goods which he (A) has 
and B has not, receiving in return that 
which he lacks himself and B has: thus a 
shoemaker exchanges shoes with a baker 
for bread. Hence we read in 9 of the 
same chapter that an association (/cot- 
vwvia) of two similar members, as two 
physicians, is impossible : it can only be 
formed by a physician and a farmer, or 
generally by members dissimilar and un 
equal, between whom equality or pro 
portion is thus said to be produced. 

Now the dissimilar members in the 
state are rulers and subjects. The former 
afford the latter a wise and intelligent 
guidance in return for which they receive 
respect (N. E. vni. 14. 3, 1163 b 6), 
willing obedience, and skilful execution 
of their commands: and the subjects, in 
return for this obedience, receive from 
their rulers the wise government before 
mentioned. On this depends the con 
tinuance and well being of the state. 
Compare further I. 2. 16, in. 10. 2, with 
notes (28 c, 562). 

But as the greatest possible equality 
amongst the citizens is the aim of Aris 
totle s best polity no less than of Plato s 
I. 7. i n. (58 b), iv(vn). 8. 4 (797), 
vi(iv). n. 8 (1293); in. 16. 2 (672), 
17 2, i 10 (440, 441), 13 9 (595), 
12 (597-9) a seeming inconsistency 
arises; compare also in. 4. 5 n. (471). 
The fuller explanation which follows in 
the text is intended to remove this in 
consistency by showing that even in the 
ideal state there is the same difference 
between rulers and subjects and the same 
adjustment of the difference, and to what 
extent this holds. Thus 4 7 dioirep 
TO IGOV ...dpxds are a digression, but one 
indispensable to Aristotle s argument, 
which, putting this aside, runs as follows : 
the state has more need than the family 
of a plurality, or more precisely of a 
plurality of dissimilar members, 2. 
Remove the dissimilarity and you destroy 
the state which is still more evident if inde 
pendence (ai/rdp/ceta) be also taken into 
account, 8. 

Camerarius, and long before him Eu- 
bulos, blame Aristotle unfairly for not see 
ing that Plato s unity of the state meant 
only the utmost possible unity concord 
and unanimity among the citizens. From 

II. 2. 6] 

1261 a 31 1261 a 39. 


eVel Kal ev rot? e\ev0epois Kal io~oi<s dvdyKrj TOVT elvai a^a (I) 
rydp ov% olov re TrdvTas dp^eiv, XX 77 KCLT eviavTov rj 
5 Kara Tiva d\\rjv Ta^uv r) %povov. Kal crvfjiftaivei Srj TOV 

35 TpOTTOV TOVTOV WCTTG TCaVTCiS dp^GLV, COO TTep dv el /jiTe/3a\\OV 
OL O~KVTels Kai 01 T6KTOV<$ K,ai fJLT) aei Ol aVTol Q-KVTOTOfJLOL 

6 Kal TeKTOvjes r)crav. eVet Be * * (3e\Tiov ourw? e^eiv Kal ra Trepl 6 
Trjv Koivcovlav TTJV 7ro\t,TLKrjv, Srj\ov w? roi)? aJroz)? del /3eX- 
TIOV dp^eiv, el SvvaTOV ev ol? Se /JLT) SvvaTov Sid TO Trjv 

32 d /m] dXXd P 1 in the margin || 33 yap] 5e F M s || 34 -ij] Kal Ar. (probably 
right) || 35 fj-erepaXov M s P 1 Susem. 1 2 || 36 det after ol avrol P 2 4 C 4 Q b T b 
U b Aid. Bk. and a later hand in P :J (omitted by the ist hand in P :j j || 37 eirel] fret 
Bernays, who by omitting with Koraes rd which follows skilfully removes all traces of 
the lacuna after 5e discovered by Conring and Schneider (viz. e/cet 5e fie\Tioi> ourws 
^X eiv Ka -i Trepl rrjv K. TT\V TTO\LTLKT]V 57J\ov) : <ou%> ourws Schlosser equally wrong: 
cp. the Comm. <j3^\TLOv ev e/cdcrry yevei ravrbv e"pyov del dtrb rCov avruv 
Kal ireipvKe ST?> /3eXrtov or something similar Thurot 

after arvftpalvei, as in vi(iv). 5. 3 av^e- 
f$T]K.ev uxjre TTJV uev Tro\ireiav elvai, and so 
De Sensti i 5, 437 b 8 01) cru/x^atVet wcrre 
SoKelv. Similarly with other verbs : Pol. 
VIIl(v). 9 8 effTiv coVr eyjtiv t/cavcGj, 
Phys. VIII. 6. 2, 258 b 17 tarw 8 evfie- 
Xo/J-evov w<rr e^ at wore. 

6 37 lirel 8e * *] The difficulty is 
that, if no laciina be assumed, OI TWJ pro 
perly refers to ay del ol avroi, and this is 
against the sense. To take ourws = cos vvv 
ourws (see c. i 3), with Lambin, ita ^^t 
suut, is as forced as to insert ou% with 

"The sense is satisfied if we supply 
something like this : But < as in fact the 
work of a carpenter is always done by a 
carpenter and never by a shoemaker, and 
from the nature of the case each work is 
more successful when executed by the 
same persons, who make this their sole 
business, and as therefore > it is better 
it should be so with political society"... 
(Thurot). SUSEM. (134) 

39 4v ols 8e KT\] " But where it is 
not possible, because all are naturally 
equal," r-qv <f>v<nv adverbial accus. with 
icrovs ; comp. 11. on I. 12 2 " and at the 
same time therefore it is but fair, whether 
a good or a bad thing for ruling," as op 
posed to obeying, "that all should take 
a turn at it this retirement in rotation I 
of the equal citizens from office imitates 
an original dissimilarity." <j>av\ov = an j 
unsatisfactory arrangement, c. 7 5, 
the thought being perhaps different from 
Plato s in Rep. I. 345 DfT., whether office 

3 35 4 5 ft, 45 5 it, 14, 15, 
19, 20 it is clear that Aristotle was 
well aware of this fact. Nevertheless it 
may easily be seen that this does not 
affect the soundness of his reasoning 
which, as even the language shows, is 
directed more especially against Republic 
v 462, where Plato is showing how the 
abolition of family life would be the 
means of making all the citizens of his 
ideal state feel as the members of a single 
family (cp. ;/. 140) or even of a single 
man (/cat TJTIS 5-rj eyyvrara wos dvdpu-rrov 
^X ei > avrr) sc. TroXis aptora dioixe iTai). Is 
this not, as Aristotle rightly puts it, to 
prescribe for the state the end of repre 
senting so far as possible an individual 
man? "Aristotle s argument is that 
unity when applied to the state is an 
analogical term, and that Plato s use of it 
subverts the very ground of the analogy" 
(Eaton). Comp. also Oncken I. 173 f. 
SUSEM. (133) 

32 rovro ro dvrnreTrovdos. There 
must needs be reciprocity even amongst 
free and equal citizens, as in the ideal 

ajjia yc -P--- 39 Svvarov] All cannot 
rule at once: the only possible alterna 
tives are (a) a perpetual ruling body, 
del or KaOdwat; (cp. I. 13 4) roi)s avrovs 
ap-%eii> : (^) alternation or rotation of 
functions, fj.eTaj3d\\et.i , d pxeti Kal d pxecr- 
dai Kara /mtpos (cp. I. i 2, III. 6 9). 
Comp. iv(vn). 14 i, 2 where this argu 
ment recurs. 

5 35 wo-T apparently redundant 

220 ITOAITIKHN B. 2. [II. 2. 6 

1261 b v<jiv I crov ? elvai Trdvras, d/jia Srj teal Sl/caiov, eir dyaOov 
eire $>av\ov TW dp^eiv, Trdvras avTOV yuere^e^, TOVTO e 
fjLifjbelTai TO ev /jiepet roi)? fcrou? eifceiv TO avo/AOiovs eivai 
7 ef dp^s. o i jjiev <ydp dp^ov(Tiv 01 8 dp^ovTai [/caTa 
5 cocrTrep dp aXXoi, yevofjievoi. Kal TOV avTov Srj TpoTrov 
eTepoi eTepas dp^ovcnv dp^ds. fyavepbv TOLVVV e/c TOVTWV cJ? 7 
ov 7re(j)VK6 jjilav OVTCOS elvai TTJV iro\iv waTrep \eyovcri Tives, 
Kal TO \%0ei> co? {Aeyiarov dya9ov ev rat? 7ro\ecnv OTL ra? 
9 TroXet? dvaipel KCLITOI TO ye eKacrTov dyaOov crcofet GKCKTTOV. 

1261!) i 5}? Susem., e T II Ar. Bk., 5ei Bas. 3 || 2 r Susem., cp. PI. Prof. 
334 A c, Euthyd. 292 D; TO F II Ar. Bk., < 777)6? > TO Thurot |] TOUTO] h TOVTOIS 
II 2 Ar. Bk. (Montecatino), yp. i> TOVTOIS p 1 in the margin || TOUTO de] ovru 8rj 
Welldon |[ S^ ftt/zetTat] de /ni/uclo-dai II 2 Ar. Bk. yp. de [u/melcrdai. p 1 in the margin, 
del: fj.LiJ.ela 6 ai Montecatino |) 3 TO ev] TU ev Heinsius Susem. 2 3 , a correction more 
plausible than sound, TO to be taken with TOUTO )| oUelv P 2 T b and C 4 (ist hand), 
olKelov C 4 (corrector), iKeiv a later hand in P 3 (the ist hand having left a lacuna) || 
TO &VO/JLOIOVS Susem., TO 5 (TO^ F) ws 6/x,otous F M s Susem. 1 in the text and P 1 
(ist hand), 6/iot ous P 2 - 3 , o/io/ws H 3 C 4 Bk., yp. d/xotws p 1 in the margin, TO Svcro- 
poiovs Schmidt (possibly right; I should adopt it if the word occurred elsewhere in 
Aristotle) || elvai FM S and P 1 (ist hand), TO?S P 2 3 4 - 6 Q b T b Ald. Bk. and yp. mg. p 1 , 
TTJS C 4 U b |j 4 KCITCC /nepos omitted by II 1 , Trapd fj.epos Vettori Bk. || 5 Kal omitted 
by II 2 Ar. Bk. || 7 cure H 2 Bk. || OUTWS after elvai M s P 1 

is or is not a source of individual ad- is equally futile. If object, the sentence 

I vantage. TOVTO TO el Kiv = this yielding means where men are naturally equal, 

of the retiring magistrates to their sue- there it is better to imitate what happens 

cessors, at the expiration of their term of in a state of natural equality ! If subject, 

office; (ujieiTcu is the counterpart or re- there is nothing to express what, as a 

flexion of original heterogeneity, pro- matter of fact, is imitated by the 

[ cluces much the same effect as if rulers rotation of office-holders, viz. natural 

j and subjects had always been distinct inequality. 

bodies of citizens. 7 5 coo-rrep av dXXoi ytvopevoi] as 

1261 b i d fxa 8^ Kal SLKCUOV KT\] if, with taking up or laying down office, 

Compare ill. 16 2 4 with ;/. (672), they assumed a new personality: 76^6- 

iv(vn). 3 5, 6 n. (740); further n. /j.evos 5 aXXos in Nic. Eth. ix. 4. 4. 
(58 b) on i. 7. r, n. (133) and (797) on dpxovTwv] gen. abs. "while (the 

IV(VII). 8. 4. SUSEM. (134 b) governors) govern, different officers in- 

2 TOVTO Se] This de with the demon- terchange different offices in the like 

strative resumes the Se with the relative fashion," i.e. in rotation: TOV avrov Tpoirov 

39 ev otj 6V: so iv(vil). 9 5, i? Se = 3 ev fiepei. 

...ravT-r/ tie. The two recensions of the 7 Tivts] That is, Plato: see esp. 

text here widely diverge ; see the Critical Rep. V 462 B. Cp. ;/. (133). SUSEM. (135) 

Notes. Bekker s text is nearly that of Also 464 B /j.e yiaTov ye TroXet avro 
P 2 : ev TOVTOIS de //.t/xetcr^ai TO ev /meei TOVS 

/mepei TOVS uj/j.oXoyrjffafj.ev dyaOov. 

IVous eixeiv 6/u.oius TO?S e dpx.-rjs. Thurot 8 Kai...(<pavepov) the construc- 

Etudes pp. 22 24 has shown the usual tion. 

modes of interpreting this text to be un- 9 KaToi...o-wi,2Ka.o-Tov] ovKavanpel. 

satisfactory. The infinitive may indeed "Cp. in. 10. 2 ou% rj 7 dpeTrj <p6eipec TO 

be governed by fie\TLov, and f ^acn (or e^ov avrrjv with n. (561 b)." SUSEM. 

a/^curt) may be understood with TO?S e% (135 b) 

dpxTJs : but whether ^...el /ceo/ be taken "What is this unity which seems 

as subject or object of /w/Aet<r0at the result to Plato so beneficial, to Aristotle so 

II. 2. 8] 

1261 b 11261 b 15. 


e KOL KCLT a\\oi> TpoTrov (fcavepov on TO \iav VOo^ v *- /j 
ii relv Tr]v TCO\LV OVK eaTiV ufjieivov. olfcia [juev yap avTap/cecm. , 
pop ei>o?, TroXt? 8 olfcia?, KOI (Bovkerai y ^8r) TOT elvai TroXt?, (P. 
OTCLV avrdp/cr) crv/jiftaivr) TTJV KOLVWVICIV elvat, TOV 7T\rj0ov<i 
eiTrep ovv alpertoTepov TO avrap/ceaTepov, teal TO TJTTOV ev 
15 TOV (JioKkov aipeTWTepov. 

mischievous? It is not (i) unanimity , 
i.e. community of political principles and 
aims, the 6/xoVota of Nic. Eth. ix. 6, 1167 
a 22, as appears from c. 9 22, 1270 b 21 
c. Nor is it (2) uniformity , i.e. the 
suppression of individuality, so that all 
the citizens are of one type : for the dis 
crimination of functions, carrying with it 
diversity of character, is, under the name 
of justice, the very foundation of the 
Platonic Tro Xts. Hence it is not (3) or 
ganization , as organization implies dis 
crimination of functions combined with 
unanimity in the sense here given to the 
word. Rather it is (4) centralization ! . 
Plato is anxious that his citizens should 
be bound together by a common interest 
in the TroXts, and, with a view toThis, 
proposes to eliminate all those inferior 
/cotfwj tat which induce subordinate affec 
tions and create separate interests, thus, 
he conceives, weakening the supreme tie 
of patriotism. On the other hand Aris 
totle regards the subordinate affections 
which are induced in the inferior Koivwviat 
for example, ot /a a, cru^TrXot, o~vffTpa- 
rtwTcu, 0uXe rcu, ST/^OTCU, <?tacrwrat, epavi- 
ffTai Nic. Eth. VIII. 9 4 f , 1 1 60 a 9, q. v. 
as valuable in themselves, and therefore 
does not desire that they should be 
merged in patriotism. Further he main 
tains that the elimination of the inferior 
KOivuvtai, which /xopt ots eot/cctcrt TT/S TroXt- 
rtKTjs sc. KOivuvlas Nic. Eth. viu. 9, 1160 
a 9, will not cause the subordinate affec 
tions to be merged in patriotism, i.e. to 
be transfei red, unimpaired in force, from 
the inferior KOIVWVLO.L to the supreme 
Koivuvla. He thinks, in fact, that the 
TroXis is properly a complex organization 
containing lesser organizations within it, 
rather than a large family or a colossal 
man. It will be observed (i) that Aris 
totle s criticisms arise directly from the 
theory of the TroXts which he has de 
veloped in the first book, and (2) that 
they indicate the same appreciation of 
<tXt a in all its fofms, ^wtrich- jias led him 
to devote to it two out of the^ten books 
of the Nic. Eth. T JACKSON. \ 
\ 8 10 evovvN^ infinitive, thy endea 

vour to intensify the unity of the state is 
not so desirable. 

1 2 povXercu = tends, means ; the mean 
ing of a state is then first realised or ful 
filled when... 

14 el irep ovv KT\] Cp. I. i. 8 nn. 
(20 b, 21); III. i 12 Tro Xti TO rwv TOL- 

n. (447), 9 14 . (560), iv(yii). 4 ii 

elo~0ai /J.7j8ev6s avrapices (764), 8 8 77 
yap TroXts 7r\rj06s <TTLV ov TO TV^OV dXXa 
Trpos far]i> aura/wees n. (804). SUSEM. 

Add iv(vn). 4. 14 8-f)\ov Toivvv ws eu 
ros O~TL TroXews 6 pos apt<TTos, 77 /n,eyio~T7] 
TOV TrXrjOovs uTrepfioXr/ Trpos avTapKeiav 

cc. 3, 4 Objections to communism, 
chiefly to the abolition of separate fami 
lies. Even supposing Plato s end, i. e. the 
most perfect civic unity, to be desirable, his 
communistic scheme is not the best means to 
secure it. A series of detached remarks, 
so closely allied in some cases that it 
would not have been difficult to bring 
them together under one and the same 
head. See fuller details Analysis pp. 
102, 103 ; and compare throughout PL 
Rep. v. 

The Platonic scheme, as Grote (in. 207) 
reminds us, is only partial communism. 
Modern communistic theories contemplate 
individual producers handing over the 
produce of their labour to be distributed 
among themselves by official authority. 
Butjhe producing_an(l labouring classes 

in the Republic are _not_communists at 
all : they are private proprietors with 
" the 

oa yopjiciinc - 
tionanes7tTTe guardians" Hence the ar- 
guments~~advanced by Aristotle, however 
just in themselves, have little direct ap 
plication to the scheme which he is os 
tensibly criticising ; they belong to a far 
wider enterprise on which he has em 
barked, an advocacy of the principle of 
individualism against socialism in general, 
beginning (i 2) with the inquiry into 
the limits of community and subsidiary 



[II 3. 1 


. cTt;cAff fjurfv ov$ el TOVTO dpiaTOV e<TTL, TO fjiiav OTL /JLCL- 8 

elvai rrjv Koivcovlav, ovBe TOVTO diro^eiicvvo-dai 

I TOP ~\,6yop, lap TrdpTes a/jua \eywcri TO efiov /cal TO 
fjbrj efjiop TOVTO yap oleTai 6 Zco/cpaTTjs (TTj/melop elpau TOV TTJP 
2 TroKip reXeco9 elpai fjiiap. TO yap Trdpres SLTTOP. el pep OVP 

/cpaTTjs (e/cao~TOS yap VLOP eavTOv (frrjcrei, TOP avTOp /cal yv- 
palrca Sr) rrjv avTtjp, /cal Trepl r^9 overlap /cal rrepl e/cdaTOV 
o~r) T&P crvfjifiaipopTCOP woravTW^^ vvv 8 oi % OVTGIS (frr/crovaip 
25 01 KOipals ^pcofjLPOL rai9 yvpai^l /cal rot9 TZKPOLS, aXXa TTCLV- 
T69 /AW, ov% W9 e/cacrT09 8 avTO)p, O/JLOLO)^ 8e /cal TTJP ova lap 
/AGP, ov^ W9 e/cacrro9 8 avTwv. OTL JJLCP TOLPVP rrapa- 
rt9 ecTTi TO \eyeip rrdpTas, (frapepop (TO ydp Trap- 
T69 /cal d/ji^OTepa /cal rrepiTTa /cal dpTia Si.d TO &ITTOP /cal 

ig 6 omitted by M^P 1 , [o] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger op.c. p. 1359 || 25 rols 
omitted by M" P 1 (? rightly) || 27 TraVes omitted by T M" || 28 rts omitted by M 8 
P 1 |i 29 OITTOV /cat < dfj.(f)i(3o\ov > or else 30 rots < /card 0tXocro</n ai> > Xo7ots Thurot; 
an ingenious suggestion, but not (as I once thought) necessary 

to his own constructive theory in B. in. 

Again, while the peculiar marriage 
system of the Republic would unques 
tionably result in the abolition of the 
ordinary separate family, Aristotle is 
unable, perhaps from a defect of imagi 
nation, fully to realize the new state of 
things which Plato intended to create. 
He persists in attaching the old meanings 
to words (3 58, 4 69), whereas 
it is Plato s avowed aim by an extension 
of the affections into an intimate and 
equal sympathy with a whole class (esprit 
de corps] to supersede nearer family rela 
tionships and extinguish private interests. 

1 1 6 TOVTO = TO fJ.iaV OTL ^&\LffTO. 

KT\. Even granting the utmost unity in 
the (civic) association to be the best, such 
unity does not appear to be made out by 
the scheme that all shall simultaneously 
apply the terms mine and not-mine. 

1 8 Kcrrcl TOV Xo-yov] with d-jrodeiK- 
vvadai, established by the proposal that 
all shall agree in their use of mine and 
not-mine: eav 7rdi T6s.../x7/ t^ov is ex 
planatory of \6yoi>. For Kara = by, cp. 
Metaph. Q. 8 14, /card re dy TOVTQV TOV 
\6yov tyavepov on. ..1050 b 3. 

19 6 SwKpa.TT]s] In Plato s Repiiblic 
V 462 C : ev rjrwc drj TroXet 7rXe?crroi kirl 
TO CLVTO /card raurd rouro \tyovffi TO efJLOV 
/cat TO oi /c e^Jiov, avTr) d picrTa 5tot/cetrat. 
SUSEM. (137) 

2 20 All has two senses, (i) 
each individual, pro se quisque ; (2) the 
whole body collectively. If all is taken 
in the former, this is perhaps more 
what Socrates means (" proposes to do"). 
24 o-\)|j.paLv6vTwv] "circumstances": 
the joys and sorrows of life Rep. 462 E. 

vvv S ovx OVTWS] But then it is not 
in this sense that communists will apply 
the term all . The whole body collec 
tively, not the individuals exclusively, 
will have the right to say "mine " in this 

26 irdvTS )( ws ^KCUTTOS] Another 
instance in in. u. 2. Also vi(iv). 4. 
26 where the distinction is skilfully 
worked in : /jLovapxos yap 6 drjuos yiveTai, 
els e/c Tro\\uV oi yap TroXXot 
ffLV oi>x us eKaaTos dXXd rravTes. 
28 TO yap iravTCs KT\] The 
all" and "both" and "odd" 
even " by reason of their am 


biguity tend to make arguments fallacious 
even in dialectical discussions (and much 
more so when handled by sophists for 
purposes of deception). 

29 KCU irepiTTo, Kal dpTici] See 5 
27 : TOVTO (i.e. TO dpTtov) ei>5x TaL T< ? 
6 Xy inrdpxew T&V oe /mep&v /iTjSer^py, De 
Soph. El. 4 7, 1 66 a 33: Trapd 5e TTJV 
dLatpeffiv OTL rd TTCVT ecrrt ^o /cat rpta, 
/cat Treptrrd /cat a prta, to (fallacious) di 
vision is due the instance, that five is two 

II 3. 4] 

1261 b 16 1261 b 37. 


3 eV roi? Xoyoi? eptcrTi/covs TroieL cri/YXo^oT^oi;? $16 eVrt TO Trav- (I) 
Ta9 TO auTo \eyeiv w$l /jij-v Kd\6v, aAA, ov Svvarov, coSl 

4 2e ovSev o^ovorjTLKOv) TT/JO? 8e TOVTOIS erepav e^et /3\d/3r]v TO 
\eyofjievov. \ rfKLara yap eiri/JLeXeias Tvy^dveu TO Tr\eia Twv 10 
KOLVOV TWV yap ISlcov i^aKidTa (frpovTi^ovaiv, TWV Be KOLVWV 

35 rjTTOv, rj ocrov eJcdcrTW e7Ti/3d\\e(> Trpo? yap Tot? aXXot? GJ? 
eTepov (fcpovTifovTos 6\iycopovcri /JLd\\op, wcrTrep eV Tat? ol/ce- 
ol TroXXol depajrovTes eWoTe ^elpov 

30 HffT-r) P 2 3 Q b T b I! 34 (ppoi>T[<rov<n PSusem. || 35 IJTTOI 77 (/ess than] T. L. 
Heath || ocro?] oVw^ p4T b U b || 36 typovTicrovTos ? Susem. 

and (is) three, odd and even (Eaton). 
SUSEM. (138) 

Walford and Postgate would take ire- 
PLTTOL /cat ctprta to be predicates of Travres 
and a^orepa. But five in the passage 
quoted above is at once an example of 
a/j.(poTpa, 2 + 3, and of irepiTTa. As d/x,- 
06re/)a=:sum of two things, so Trepirrd 
an odd sum total, a/3Tia = an <?? <, sum 
total. In all three cases the fallacy is 
not really due to ambiguity in the terms 
themselves, as Aristotle admits De Soph. 
El. 20 2, i7yb 7, ov diTTOv TO irapa dia.i- 
pecriv, unless the confusion of two things 
as distinct as 8pos and o/m be said to be 
due to ambiguity. 

30 ev TOIS Xo-yois] in disputations, in 
dialectic. SUSEM. 

epurriKovs] Because they may be con 
strued both collectively and distributively 
(Schneider) : in Aristotle s phrase Htliey 
admit of <rvv0e(ris and diaipecris, illicit 
combination and disjunction. See DC 
Soph. El. 4 6 166 a 22, 6 3 168 a 26, 
20 i 177 a 33, 30 7 181 b 20: KCU yap 
TO a/x0w /cat TO airavTa TrXetw cr^atj et, 
the words both and all have several 
meanings (Eaton). Further compare 
VIIl(v). 8. 3: TrapaXoyifeTai yap-fj didvota 
VTT O.VT&V, wairep 6 cro0tcrrt/cos \6yos el 
(KaffTov [j.t.Kp6i>, Kal iravTOi (illicit vvvdevi.?). 
SUSEM. (139) 

3 1 w8l] as o>s e/cacrros ; cSSl 8^ = 

32 ovSev opLovoTjTiKov] Since demo- 
crats^ may guaffel , aTtrTougTT TravTes IAV, 
ovx ws ZKCLCTTOS d they are supreme in 
the state. The individuals whose unity 
is Plato s main object can call nothing 
their own ; it is only the body politic as 
a whole, after all, that can say "mine". 

4 Then comes a sensible practical 
suggestion. Comp. Jowett, lutrod. to 
Plato s Republic p. 166 f., who refers to 
the statistics of mortality in foundling 


irpos 8e TOTJTOLS KT\] In the next 
place, the scheme in question has ano 
ther disadvantage. The property shared 
by the greatest number meets with the 
least attention. For men care most about 
their private matters and less for the 
public concerns. The zeal and attention 
of individual owners are checked and 
chilled by division of ownership. So 
with the sons who are a common pos 
session of the Guardians. 

35 TJ 6 <rov eKacTTO) e-mpaXXei] or (only 
at most) in proportion to their stake in 
them. Since the whole clause answers 
to ftctXto-ra and TITTOV, the verb would 
seem to be impersonal: as much as it 
falls to each man s share to care. For 
the impersonal use, see I. 13 8. For 
the meaning, Herod, vil. 23 /u.6piov oaov 
avTolcn eTT^aXXe : hence Herod, iv. 115 
avroXaxofres T&V xp-^arwj TO e7rt/3ciX- 
Xo^ = their due share. Camerarius cites 
Ptolemy as using the word to express 
proportional parts in astronomical calcu 
lations. The same thought recurs 1 262 a 
3 in the words OTTOCTTOS Tvy-^dveL TOV dpiG- 
/j.6v u>v. If the society consists of a 
thousand members, the interest of each 
is represented by the fraction T fnrj- Bvit: 
such is the tendency of human nature 
that the interest felt and care bestowed 
will be even less than this. 

irpos v^P Toi:s otXAois KT\] Each is 
more likely to neglect them, amongst 
other reasons, because there is some one 
else to look after them; just as with the 
attendance of servants it sometimes hap 
pens that the work is not so well done 
by many as by few. 

5 According to Plato s regulations, 
Rep. v 457 C 464 B, all the children of 
the Guardians, the two upper classes who 
are full citizens of his ideal state, are to 
be taken from their mothers directly after 



[II 3. 

5 -rovai TWP e\arr6pcop. ryivovrai efcdaTw %i\ioi TCOP 

viol, Kal OVTOL ov% w? e/cdcTTOv, d\\d rov TV^GPTOS 6 
12623 G /Wo)? ecrrlp vlos ware Trapres 6/Wo)<? o\Lya)pjj(70vo-ip, 67rel 

eVacrro? eyu>o9 \eyei TOP ev Trpdrropra TWP 7ro\ira)p r] K ax cos, 
OTTOCTTO? Tvy%dpei TOP dpiO^ov COP, olop ,1109 r) rov Selpos, TOV- 

1262 a i etrd Biicheler, on ? Susem., hi P II Ar. Bk. Bonitz seeks to prove 
that this alone is right (Hermes vn. p. 102 ff.), and in the Addenda to my critical 
edition, p. Ixix, I somewhat hastily acceded. If en be accepted there must be a 
full stop before it || 2 Aeet P (?) Ar. (?) Susem. 1 >2 || 3 r&v dpi6p.uv P 3 and the 
ist hand in P 1 - Q b (emended by a later hand in Q b ), T&V dp9fj.wv T b || u>v omitted by 
II 2 Ar. || rov delvos II Ar. and also probably P, Jniht s filiits William || In the 
whole passage i 14 Schmidt proposes extensive changes thus : 6\iytpri(rov<nv. Kpe lr- 
rov a pa. idiov dve^Lov clvai (transposed from 13) evbs rov avrov /novov irpoaayopev- 
oi Tos, <i7> cUcrxtAiwf 77 /ecu /Avpiuv rov rpowov rovrov viov. en rovrov rov rpoirov 
<vibv> \ey<ovr>wv /cct^ eKQ.a TOv r(av yj\(wv [?}] QQ~UV rj TroXts eor/v, ovrus 
e/nous Xe^et <ws /<at> rov ed irpdrrovra ruiv TTO\L~WV rj /ca/cws OTTOCTTOJ uv, Kal rovro diffrdfav [et fJii] ep.ov rov rov 5e?vos] adr)\ov KT\ 

birth. The sickly and deformed are to 
be exposed, as well as the offspring of 
incapable parents and of unions formed in 
violation of the laws and magisterial au 
thority (provided recourse has not been 
had to abortion in this latter case). The 
remainder are committed to public nur 
series or creches, in order that the real 
parents and children may be kept in ig 
norance of each other and that no fa 
vouritism may be shown. According to 
definite gradations of age all the Guardi 
ans alike are to treat one another and 
feel love for one another as parents and 
children, grandparents and grandchildren, 
brothers and sisters. See n. (133)- SU 
SEM. (140) 

38 x^iXioi] Not a fixed number, but 
merely suggested as a convenient round 
number by J\ep. iv 423 A. Now each 
of Plato s citizens has a thousand sons, 
not in the sense that each of them is Jus 
son exclusively, but (in the sense) that 
any of them is just as much a son of any 
other of the elder citizens. And the con 
sequence will be that all these fathers 
alike will be indifferent to him. 

39 o^x ws IKCUTTOV] Not as being 
children of his individually ; but to any 
of the children (of a given year) any of 
the fathers (of that year) stands in a 
paternal relation. 

1262 a i eirel OVTWS KT\] Almost 
word for word from Rep. V 463 E, iracriJov 
dpa irb\ewv ^udXtara ev aurrj ^v/j,(pu>vrjcroiicriv 
ev6s TWOS rj ev r) /ca/ccDs Trpdrrovros, o 


vvvdrj e\yo/j<ev ro pij/^a, rb bri, rb 
ev TrpdrrcL rj on rb e/j.6v /ca.vws: i.e. 
when any individual member fares well 
or ill, they will all with one accord use 
the expression it is well with mine or 
it is ill with mine. Hence translate: 
"As [or if en be retained, "Further] 
each of the elder citizens, when he uses 
the term my son to express his sym 
pathy in the joy or sorrow of a younger 
comrade, uses it only in the sense of the 
fractional part which he himself forms 
of the whole body of citizens. That is, 
he says my son or so and so s ; and 
this so and so s applies equally to each 
of the thousand citizens or whatever the 
number of which the state consists. " To 
take e,uos = my son (not my brother or my 
father] is justified by uoj in the preced 
ing line, 6 rexvov, 14 viov (cp. 4 7). In 
spite of the %i Xtot vioi (b 38) it is the 
elder generation, the fathers , that are 
meant by r&v xtAwj> r) ocrwv KT\. In fact 
the hypothetical round numbers (see 6 
Si<rx i A wi Kal /mvpiuv) serve merely to pre 
sent the case definitely and vividly. To 
our cos corresponds OTTOO-TOS...^, as rovrov 
rov rpbTrov to rov delvos] mine or A s or 
B s, and so on through all the thousand. 
When a father uses the term my 
son in Callipolis he will be aware that 
he shares the relation with a number of 
other fathers . 

2 i|j,6s] Editors compare Soph. Antig. 
565, dAX rjde /j.evroi /j,r) \eye. 

3 otov = I mean. 

II. 3. 7] 1261 b 381262 a 9. 

TOZ^ TOZ^ rpoTrov \eywv /caB* eKacrroy rwv 


^, rj oacov 77 (I) 

5 Trofc? earl, /cal TOVTO BidTa^coi aSrjXov yap c5 avve/Sij yeve- (P. 26) 
6 crOat, re/cvov ical awQ^vai yevofievov. Kairoi TTOTepov ovrco 12 
TO e/j,ov \eyeiv eKdO TOv, TO avro JJLGV Trpocrayopevov- 

KOI fjbvpwv, rj 

GO? vvv ev rat? 

7 TO e/j,ov \eyov<nv] o JJLGV yap vlov avrov o Be 


7 [e?/cacr7-oi>...8 /nvpiuv] Schmidt (transposed as above) || ph] ovopa Bonitz, per 
haps rightly: yet the instances in which p.ev in Aristotle stands without any de 
following have not yet been sufficiently explained : /jiijdev with a comma after (in 
stead of before) TO auro Bernays || TrpoaayopevovTa Bernays, perhaps rightly: yet 
the plural may be intentional although the participle goes with ZKCLVTOV \\ 8 KCU] 
rj Susem. 1 aut William || 9 [TO e,u.oV] Schmidt || vlov avrov M H P 2 - 3 - 4 Aid. and 
apparently P 1 || d5e\0oV OLVTOV F and apparently F 1 , d5eA0oi avrov M 8 P 2>3 - 4 Aid., 
a5e\(poi> [auTou] Schmidt 

5 Kal TOVTO KT\] And even this he 
says dubiously, for it is never certain who 
of the citizens actually had a son or whose 
son, if born, was reared. At first sight 
this seems to make against Aristotle ; for 
if less than the thousand had sons, the 
fractional interest of each elder citizen, 
or father, in the younger generation is 
increased. But then his chance of being 
childless is proportionately increased. 

6 " And yet is it better in this 
fashion for each of the 2,000 or 10,000 
elder citizens to use the term mine (of 
any one), all calling him by the same 
name" viz. son or as it is used under 
the present system with the addition of 
different names, as nephew, cousin, &c? 

7 ^Kao~TOv..,8 p.vpCwv] Of course only 
those citizens are meant whose age entitles 
them to call a boy son and not bro 
ther or grandson . Here TO airr6 = son. 
SUSEM. (141) With CU TO piv KT\ may 
be mentally supplied dXiyiopovvTas d TTO.V- 
T0)v (Thurot). 

8 SurxiXfav] Is this genitive after 
%Ka<rToi>, as above? Is it not more forcible 
if taken after TO auTO = the same relation? 
Each calls him mine , (which will result 
in) the whole body (plural) calling one 
person the same relation of some 2,000 
people (T. L. Heath). 

A different construction of 6 is pro 
posed by Bonitz ; viz. to take eKacrrov as 
the object, instead of the subject, of \^- 
yew, and to make 5i<rxtAtwi the genitive 
after T6 CLVT& o vofia, which is a correction 
for jxev : "is it better in this sense to 
call each (of the younger generation) 
mine , using the same name [i.e. son] 
for 2,000 or 10,000?" In the same essay 


(Hermes vn pp. 102 8) Bonitz defends 
the MS. reading ri (a i) on the ground 
that a new objection, No. 3, is there in 
troduced. The last, No. i ( 4 irpbs d 
rovTois...6\L yupr]crov(ri) dwelt on the de 
preciation which the term my father 
suffers. The multitude of fathers, whom 
each of the younger men has, is preju 
dicial and fatal to the loving attention 
which a son otherwise receives from a 
father." In the passage which follows 
(i TI OUTWS...I4 vlov) "the fact is viewed 
from the opposite side. The name my 
son loses all value, as each one who uses 
it shares the problematic relationship with 
an indefinitely large number." With all 
deference to authority so weighty, it may 
be doubted if the two sides are opposed : 
at all events in a 13 (Kpelrrov yap KT\) the 
point of view is the advantage of the 
younger generation no less than in a i 
(6\Lyup-?l<Tov(n). Comp. Susemihl Quacst. 
Crit. vi p. i6ff. 

796 |J^v Y^P KT VI " For one 
and the same person is called by one man 
his own son; by another his own brother, 
or cousin ; (by another) according to some 
other kinship^either by blood relationship 
or by some connexion and affinity to him 
self in the first instance or else to his kin: 
and furthermore by another his clansman, 
his tribesman. For it is better to be actually 
an own cousin than in Plato s sense a 
son." There is at present a kind of com 
munity in relationship : only it does not 
extend so far and is compatible with dis 
similar individual interests. 

" For <j)pa,Topa, <f>v\frr)v consult the 
following references: 5 17 n. (169), n 
3 with Exc. iv ; in. 2 3 (451), 9 13 




[II. 3. 7 

10 TTpoaayopevei rov avrov, o 8 dvetyiov, r) /car d\\rjv rivd (I) 
crvyyeveiav, rj ?rpo? aLuaros 77 /car olfceiorrjra Kal Krjfteiav 
avrov 7rpo)Tov rj roov avrov, 777309 Se rouTot? 6T6p09 (frpdropa, 
(f)v\eri^v. Kpelrrov yap iSiov dve^fnov elvcu 77 rov rpoTrov rov- 
8 rov vlov. ov fjirjv aTOC ovSe $ia(f)vyeiv Svvarov TO jjur) rivas 13 

15 V7ro\a/m,(3dveiv eavrwv aSeX^ou? re Kal Tralbas Kal rrarepa^ 
/cal /jujrepas Kara yap ra? o/zotor^ra?, at yivovrai rot? 
TT^O? TOI)? yevvrjcravTas, dvay/caiov \a^aveiv Trepl 

9 d\\tj\a)V ra? Trtcrret?. ovrep (pacrl teal crvfji/BaiveiV rives TOJV 
ra? T^9 7779 TreptoSou? Trpayf^arevo/jLevwi elvai yap TKTI 

20 TWZ^ ai w Ai/Bvcov /coivds ra? yvvai/cas, rd fjievroi yevopeva 
reKva SiaipelcrOai Kara rd<$ o/jiOLorrjra^. elcrl Se nve<; Kal 
yvvalites Kal rwv ciXkwv ^qjcov, olov ITTTTOI /cal /3o69, at 
a(f)6pa TrefyvKacnv ofjuoia aTroSiBovai rd reKva rot9 yovev- 

4 <jiv, warrep r) ev ^apadX.w K\r)0elcra Ai/cala WTTTO?. ert Se 11 

25 /cal ra9 roiavras Svcr^epela^ ov paSiov evhaftijOfjvai rots 
ravrif]v /carao~Kevd^ovo~L rr)v Koivwviav^ olov al/clas /cal (povov? 
[dicovcrlovs 701)9 Se] e/coucr/ou9 Kal l^dyas Kal \oi$opias (Sv 

12 avrov ai roG Bk., avrov aurou Til || -^] etra ? Susem. || ^repos Lindau, 
T II Ar. Bk., ere/xx Bernays, eralpov Spengel || 13 <^> <pv\<?TT)v Bas. 3 Bk., 
?// contribuletn William || traupov <r}> (pparopa <rj> (frvXeT-rjv Schmidt || 27 
[aKoixriovs TOVS Se] Bender, aKovaiovs [rot)s 5e CKOVCTLOVS] Congreve; roi)s 5(^ e/foi;- 
0-i ous omitted by P 2 , which proves nothing against their genuineness, still should not 
the brackets include all four words? See Comm. || Lambin omitted Kal /u.dxas 

(558); vi(iv). 14 4 (1321 b), 15 17 
(1367); vn(vi). 4 19 (1427), 5 9 
(1437); Vlll(v). i 10 (1499), 4 10 
(1526), 5 n (1564), 8 19 (1626)." 
SUSEM. (141) 

8 Yet after all parents would sus 
pect relationship from the likeness of 
their own children. Comp. Jowett on 
the Republic p. 165 if. 

17 Xa[j.pdvLV rds -irurTeis] derive 
their convictions; so in iv(vii). i. 6. 

9 19 T<XS TT]S yr\S irepioSovs] Books 
of travel round the world, as in Rhct. I. 
4. 13 (where see Cope s exhaustive note), 
Meteor, i. 13. 13, II. 5. 14. Such books 
were also called TrepiirXoi and Trepir/yrjaeLS. 

Usually Trpay/mareveadai takes repi ; but 
once, Khet. I. 2. 5, it has -rrpos. In Pol. 
iv(vil). 14. 8 we have roOr av CLTJ rw vo- 
fjLoO^Ty 7rpay/j,a.Tevroi>, OTTWS... 

20 TUTI TWV d vw Atpuiov] See Exc. 
I. to B. II p. 326 ff., as regards the evidence 
for these customs. Comp. also i. 2. 4 n. 

(n) and n. (116). SUSEM. (142) 

24 wo"7rp...l ir7ros] The same remark 
in Hist. Anim. vii. 6. 8, 586 a 12 
(Schneider). Further compare De Gener. 
Anim. IV. 3. i, 767 b 5 : 6 /XT? eoi/ccbs rots 
yovevaiv ijdr) rpoirov riva rtpas eariv Trap- 
expedite yap TJ (fivcns h TOUTOLS K TOV 
ytvovs rpoTrovTivd (Eaton). SUSEM. (143) 
AiKaia here probably means "docile": 
Xenophon Cyneget. 7 4, Memorab. IV. 
4. 5 : (paal d nves Kal LTTTTOV Kal fiovv 
TOJ fiovXa/uLfrit) diKaiovs iroL-fjaaffdai. -rravra 
yuecrra elv at T&V dida^ovruv (Jackson). 

c. 4 1 25 rds Toiavras] the fol 

27 [aKOVO-l oVS TOVS 8^] CKOVO-fovs] 

Can it be said that a divine law forbids 
involuntary homicide in the case of 
father, mother, &c, but permits it in other 
cases ? On the contrary, responsibility 
ceases for involuntary acts ; nothing but 
negligence is then punishable ; nor can we 
talk of such acts being allowed. Bu 

II 4. 2] 

1262 a It 122a 84. 

Kal TOU? (I) 

ovSev QGIOV ecrTi yiveaOai 77736? Trarepas teal 

fj,r) Troppa) Trjs (rwyyevelas oWa?, waTrep 777)09 TOU? 

30 a\\a Kal irKelov avuftaivziv dvay/caiov dyvoovvTwv rj <yva)- 

pi^ovTCov, /cal yevo/^evayv TWV fj,ev yvwpi^ovTwv evSe^eTai ra? 

ha^ yiveaOai Xu<m?, TWV Be fir) <ov>^efjbiav^ ^ CLTOTTOV Be i 
TO KOLVOVS TTOLijcravTa TOI)<? viovs TO a-vvelvai, JJLOVOV dfa- 
TGOV epwvTwv, TO S epav fjirj KO)\v<Tai, ///^Se ra? 

29 diroOev M S P 1 4 L 8 Aid. || 30 dXXd] d II 1 (yp. dXXd corr. 1 in the margin of 
P 1 ) II 3 2 W <ov>5eftiav Jackson, <p.r]> fj.tj8efj.iav Schneider, fj.rjSefj.lav II 2 Ar. Bk. 
Susem. 1 2 3 , fj.t)5e fj,iav Ii l || 33 Troiriffavras F Ar. and M s (ist hand) 

intentional homicide is forbidden by theT"f 
law of God and of nature in the case ofj 
the nearest blood relations, while under! 
certain circumstances it is allowed in the- 
case of strangers. So too outrage, blows,| 
abuse are all intentional acts. On these! 
grounds the words bracketed must bet 
regarded as an interpolation (Bender)j 
SUSEM. (144) 

28 wv oiiSev oo-iov] To this Plato 
might certainly reply, that where relation 
ship is abolished, crimes (even if they are 
still committed) cannot be aggravated by 
the fact of being crimes against relations 
(Oncken). SUSEM. (145) 

32 Xvfis= expiations. Editors com 
pare Rep. II 364 E : ws apa \vaeis re Kal 
Ka6apfj,ol ddiKrifj.aT(i}v did OvcnCov Kal TTCU- 

TeXevTrjffaffLV) ds 8r) re\erds Ka\ovo~t.v : 
Eur. Or. 510 <(>6vov (f>bvui Xucrcu, 597 fj.1.- 
afffj,a \vcrai. Such purifications for homi 
cide were unknown in the Homeric age. 
Grote, Hist. I. 34, compares Thuc. I. 126 
128 for their great importance. 

TV 8 KT\] "All the editors as 
sume that the words T&V 5e fj.r)8efj.iav, 
whether with or without Schneider s ad 
dition, stand for rwv 5e fj.r) yvwp^ovrwv ev- 
8^x Tai fJ.riftefj.iav ylveadai \V(TLV, as if 
Aristotle wished to say it is possible that 
no expiation should be made . He ought 
however to say it is not possible that 
any expiation should be made . Hence 
I conjecture rwv de fj.ri, <oidefj.iav." 

2, 3 oiToirov 8 KT\] Rep. III. 403 
A, B: oudev apa irpoffoia T^ov /maviKov 
ovde %vyyeves d/coXacrtas ry opdi^ 
("purl, ov TrpoffOLffreov apa avrr/ TJ -rjdov r] 
(sc. ij irepl rd d(ppodi<ria) ovde KOLvwvrjTeov 
avTrjs tpaffrrj re Kal TratSt/coZs opdws epQxrl 
re Kal p(i)fj,e t>ois...ovT(ij dr}, &s ^ot/ce, VO/JLO- 
OeTijffeis iv rr) oiKifrfj.e vrj TroXei 
fj,ei> Kal ^vvelvai. Kal d Trreo-^at 

i/ie"os TratSt/cwi/ epacrrrjv, 
eav Treidr]...ei 5e ^177, ifroy 
ctTretpo/caXtas vtp^ovra. With this com 
pare v 468 c, where the gallant soldier 
is rewarded with the right to kiss his com 
rades upon the expedition, Kal fj,rj8eviee i- 
vai a.7rapvr)6rjvai. ov av (BovXr/Tai 0tXf?f, iva 
Kai, edv T/J TOV rvxTJ e pwv rj appevos rj 
Or)\eias, Trpodv/j-orepos ^ Trpos rb rdpia Te ia 
(pepew. See also Zeller s Plato p. 455 f. 
SUSEM. (146) 

34 r6 8 Ipdv [ii] KcoXvoxu KT\] This 
objection might apparently be met, like 
the last, n.( 145), by some sort of defence. 
It would however be open to reply on 
behalf of Aristotle that if the relation of 
Guardians to one another is seriously to 
be taken as that of parents and children, 
brothers and sisters, it is unseemly at any 
rate to make such strong concessions to 
sensual passion whatever may have been 
Aristotle s own opinion on the direction 
it took in Greece (see on io 9). Besides, 
the Platonic institutions take precautions 
against the "marriage" of those who are 
actually parents and children, a fact 
overlooked by Oncken, who (i. 181) 
attributes to Aristotle an objection which 
he neither did nor could bring against 
Plato on that score but none at all 
against the "marriage" of actual brothers 
and sisters: comp. Rep. V 461 E, dSeX- 
(povs 8e Kal d5eX0ds 5o><m 6 v6fj.os crvvoi- 
Kelv, Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 171. As 
Aristotle does not take especial exception 
to this it must be assumed that he did not 
feel his Greek sentiments excessively out 
raged, any more than Plato, by incest 
under this form. It is also significant 
that he has no word of blame for the 
deception whereby the rulers in the ideal 
state are directed to ensure that as many 
as possible of the ablest guardians of both 
sexes procreate children, and as few as 
possible of those who are inferior, Rep. 

IS 2 


1262 b 


228 nOAITIKHN B. 4. [II. 4. 2 

ra? XXa?, a? Trarpl Trpc? woz> eZz^at irdvTtov ecrrlv (I) 

/ca e(jc TT/DO? e()v, ee a 
IJLOVOV. (iTOTTOV Be /cal TO TTJV avvovcriav dfyeKeiv oY d\\ir]v (P. 27) 
/zez; alriav ///^Se/uW, GO? XtW Se tV^fpa? TT/? rjbovrjs yivo- 
fjuewrjs OTL 8 o /zez> Trarrjp rj mo?, ol 5 aSeXc^ot 
/uirjSev olecrOai Biacfrepeiv. 4 oiKe 8e p.<xXXov rots 
ttvcu xpi]cri|jLov TO Koivds etvai ras yuvaiKas Kal TOVS irai- 
8as tj rots <|>iiXa|Lv TTTOV "y^P ^trrai <j>i\ia KOIVWV OVTWV 
TCOV TKvwv Kal Tc3v ^vvaiKwv, 8i 8^ TOIOVTOVS etvai TOVS dp- 
Xojxevovs Trpos TO TrctOapxeiv Kal (AT| VWTepi^iv. bXcu? O 16 

crv[Ji(3aLveiv dvdyK?} rovvavriov Bid rov TOIOVTOV VO/JLOV wv Trpocr- 
ij/cei, TOVS op0a)<; Kei/jievovs VO/JLOVS alrlovs ywecrOai, fcal Si TJV 
alrlav 6 Sco/c/oaTT/? OVTCOS oleTai Seiv TaTTeiv TCL irepl TCL re- 
KVCL teal ra? yvvctLKas. <fyi\iav re yap olbfJieOa 
elvai TOOV dyaOwv rat9 Tro\eo-iv (OUTGO? yap dv rjKlaTa 

Kal TO {jLiav elvai Trjv Trb\iv eTraivel fjid\io-0" 6 Sa>- 

35 elvcu omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, supplied by p 1 ) || 40 &n/ce...b 3 vewre- 
pieiv Thurot transposes this passage to follow 1264 a 40 Koivuviav, Susem. to follow 
1262 b 24 TToXtreuo^ois, Introd. 79 || SeTII Bk., drj Susem.; the alteration stands 
or falls with the transposition 

1262 b 4 <rv/j.l3aivei P 4 T b U b and Q b (ist hand, emended by a later hand) || 6 ou- 
TWS omitted by M s P 1 |) 7 re omitted by M 8 ? 1 , quidctn William, but nothing can 
be inferred from this with regard to F 

v 457 c 461 E. See Zeller s Plato p. 
455, 477 8: Susemihl Plat. Phil. II 170. 
SUSEM. (147) 

Xpilo-ei.s = endearments. 

35 as iraTpl ...... a/irpeTrt o-TaTov] But 

the words uaTrep vieos, Rep. in. 4031?, do 
not bear this implication. Plato permits 
to the opdbs fyws only such familiarities 
as would be unimpeachable as between 
father and son. 

36 Kal TO 4pav [Aovov (dirpeTrea Tarov 
eo-rtj ) according to Greek ideas. Such 
power lay in a little word to extinguish 
the fiercest passions, Laws vin 838 B. 

3 37 81 aXXt]v p.^v alT^av \ir\Se- 
p-iav] True there is no other reason 
assigned, but there may well be irony 
under the terms d/novaia and direipoKaXia 
(see the quotation n. 146) : especially 
when viewed in connexion with the noble 
conception of Socrates moral character 
and the language of gallantry at the same 
time put into his lips by Plato. See Ap- 
pendix I to Dr. Thompson s Phacdrus, 
esp. pp. 153, 161 ff. The attempt to trans-] 

figure and etherialize gross passion was 
pitched in too exalted a strain of romanti- 
cism. Plato himself renounced it after- 
wards. His matter-of-fact disciple simply 
ignores it. 

4 is out of place here; perhaps it is a 
later marginal note by the author. 

5 1262 b 3 oXws Se] Comp. I. 6. 
5 11. "Such a law must bring about the 
very opposite to that which ought to be 
the result of well-framed laws and to 
that which was Socrates own reason (c. 2. 
i) for thinking that the institutions re- 
garding women and children ought to be 
thus ordered." 

This criticism seems unfair. Such 
private friendships and affections as 
Aristotle is thinking of do not, according 
to Plato, promote concord in the state 
generally, but rather divert men s atten- 
tion from the whole community into 
private channels, and by creating private 
interests tend to selfishness and disunion. 
So the Spartan love of domesticity is 
censured; Rep. vm 548 A, B. 

IT. 4. 8] 

1262 a 351262 b 19. 


10 /c/9T?79, o /cal SoKec KaK&ivo^ elval (j)rjcri, TT;? (f)i\las epyoVy (I) 
KaOaTrep ev rot? epwriicow \6<yois tajjuev \eyovra TOV Apt- 
o-TO(f)dvr)v W9 TWV epwvTwv Bid TO o-(f>6Spa $L\,elv eTridv/jiovv- 
Twv (Tv/jL(pvr]vai /cal yevecrdai /c Svo OVTWV [a/LK^orepof?] eva 

7 evravBa JJLGV ovv dvajKij d/jityoTepovs e^Odpdai, r) TOV eva, ev 17 

15 $6 TT) 7ro\L TTJV fyiKiav dvay/calov vSaprj <yivea6ai, Sid rr)v 
KOivwviav Trjv Toiavryv, KOI r^Kicrra \eyeiv TOV efiov 77 viov 

8 Trarepa rj Trarepa vlov. wcnrep <ydp fit/cpov yXv/cv et? TTO\V 
vBo)p /jLL^Oev dvaicrOiYTOp TTOLGL rrjv rcpdcrtv, ovrco (TVfJbftaivei 
Kal rr)v ol/ceiOTfjTa rrjv Trpo? d\\TJ\ovs rrjv djro TWV ovo^d- 

13 (Tvn<t>vvcu P 2l3 Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. (perhaps more correct), <Tv/j,(f>VTJai P 4 (ist 
hand), ffv/j.(pvvfjai P 4 (corr.) \\ [d^orepofs] Congreve || 14 el TQV eVa Conring, 
ei TOV eva. jvfJL^aivei.> ? Susem., es TOV eva. Tyrrell || 19 /cat] Kara Lambin, /cat 
<7re/3t> Koraes in his Commentary; /cat </cara> Bernays and independently, but 
hesitatingly, Vahlen (Ztschr. /. d. iistr. Gyiun. xxm. 1872. p. 539), but Bernays 
makes avayKcuov 6V (omitting the comma before dia^povTi^eiv) depend on av/j,(3aivei, 
while Vahlen takes this as an absolute accusative. This slight alteration is certainly 
preferable to that proposed for diacppovTifrw (see below), but, as Vahlen rightly 
judges, not absolutely necessary: either dvaiadrjTov etVat can be supplied with Vahlen, 
or the ace. rty ot/cetor^ra KT\ taken as the object of SiafpovTifav, with Congreve 
and Susem. 1 ; then avayKcuov 8i> is to be construed, as Bernays does, omitting the 
comma ; in the former case it is an absolute accusative. Bender (partly anticipated 
by Spengel) suspects dvayKcuov 6v \\ rrjv Trpos] etVac TT/OOS Spengel 

6 10 (JnXtas] Cp. vi(iv). ii. 7: ij 
yo-p Koivuvta, <PI.\I.KOV. SUSEM. 

11 4v TOIS ipwTiKois \6-yois] Plato 
Syniposion 192 C sq. comp. 191 A. Hug 
in p. x of his edition of that dialogue 
considers epom/cot Xo7ot to be another 
title for the Syniposion; but this could 
only be allowed if the text read "Plato 
in the discourses on love" whereas it is 
"Aristophanes in the discourses on love," 
and there is nothing to hinder our sup 
plying "contained in Plato s Symposion." 
Moreover Plato s own theory of love in 
its fulness and integrity is there given to 
Socrates alone, who expressly combats 
the suggestion made by Aristophanes that 
it is "seeking the other half of ourselves" 
205 D; cp. 212 C. Yet no doubt, in so 
far as Aristotle here makes use of the 
thought expressed by Plato s Aristophanes, 
Plato agrees with the latter. This much 
is clear, that Aristotle intends to desig 
nate Plato as the author of the Sympo 
sion. SUSEM. (148) 

12 w TCOV epwvTwv KT\] The genitive 
absolute after \eyovra, instead of 6Vt or 
accusative and infinitive. 

7 14 !vT(uj9a KT\] "In this case 
either both will be spoiled or at least the 
one absorbed in the other." 

15 vSaprf] watery, i.e. diluted )( un 
mixed, a/cyoaros: Aesch. Again. 770 vdapel 
aaiveiv ^tXo r^rt, Poetics 27 13, 1462!:) 7 
vdaprj fj.OQoi , a tame spun-out plot. 

1 6 T|Kio-Ta X-yeiv = least likely to ap 
ply the term mine : 3 5. Owing to a 
feeble esprit de corps they would take 
little pains to assert the relationship. 
"Plato if called upon for an answer to 
this reasoning would probably have 
allowed it to be just ; but would have 
said that the diluted friendship per 
vading all the Guardians was apt and 
sufficient for his purpose, as bringing the 
whole number most nearly into the con 
dition of one organism. Strong exclusive 
affections between individuals he wishes 
to discourage; the unfriendly sentiments 
he is bent on rooting out." (Grote in. 
220 n.) 

8 18 OVTW crufj.(3cuvi. Kal TT)V oi- 
Kio n]Ta] So too is it in the end with 
the mutual affection implied in these 
names : au/u/So/pei sc. o.vo.iaQt]rov dvai. 



[II. 4. 8 

20 TCOV TOVTCov, SLacf)povTL^iv~^KL(7Ta dva^Kotov ov ev TTJ 7ro\iTela (I) 
rfj TOiavTr) rj Trarepa eo? vlov rj vlov co? Trarpo?, r) co? 

9 aSeX^oi)? aXX^XcozA Suo ryap ecm,v a fjuaXidTa TTOLGL Kij^GdOat 
TOI)? dvOpcoTTOvs fcal (f)i\6iv, TO re l$iov real TO dyaTT^rov &v 

24 ov&erepov olov re itTrdp^eiv rot? oura) Tro^LTevo/jievois. < e ot/ee 
4 a 41 <S?) fjLa\\ov rot? yecDpyoL? eivcu %pijcri{jiov TO tcoivas elvai ra? <yv- 

b i <val/ca<> teal TOU? vratSa? ?? Tot? cj)v\a%i,v TJTTOV yap ecrrat (j)L\ia 

2 <KOLVWV OVTCOV TWV TtKvwv Kcii Tu>v yvvaiicwv, 8e2 Se ToiovTovs elvai 

3 <TOU? dp%o/jievovs vrpo? TC TreiOap^eiv /cal JJLTJ vea>Tepi^eiv.> aXXa is 
9 25 yu-^y /cal Tre/ol roO neTafyepeiv TCI <yev6[jLeva Tercva, TCL fiev IK 

20 TOIJTUV 6t a (ppovri^eLv and [6V] Spengel : TOVTUV <dia<poprjdf)vai> , di.a(f)poi>Tiew 
Camerarius : TOVTWV < 5ia<popr)9r)i>a.L or diafiOapTJvat, ws> diaffipoisTifeiv ? Schneider: 
TOVTUV ia.<ppelv>, (ppovTi ^Lv Madvig: TOVTUV, <ws> Sta^po^rtfetv Koraes in the 
text, but the absolute accus. is also possible without ws 1] wa7/caro/ o?/] a^a7/cc{fetj 
Bender (no comma before SiafipovTifciv) \\ 21 utou] vlwv P 2 3 Q b T b Aid. Bk. || 
tbs after 22 d5eX0oi)s Ridgeway || 25 yevo/j-epa Susem., yivo/j-eva II Bekk., 
? Gottling 

The special affections would be lost in 
the general sense of comradeship. This 
seems simplest, though it is also possible 
to govern ot /cetorT/ra by 5ta0poj>Ti^~eti ; so 
that either 77 warepa KT\ is the subject of 
dia(f)povTieiv, as Congreve and Susemihl 
think, or as Ridgeway Transactions 11. 132 
proposes 77 Trarepa KT\ is to be regarded 
as epexegetic of the wider term ot /cetd- 
Ttjra. He translates: so the result is 
that in such a constitution as Plato s least 
of all is it necessary to have regard for 
the mutual family feelings implied in 
these names (of father and son). 

21 irarepa cos vlov KT\] "that one 
citizen should care for another as father 
for son, or son for father, or as one 
brother for another." Ridgeway aptly 
compares vm(v). n. 21 Tafj.iav us KOIVWV 
dXXd, /XT? ws Idiwv, Mctaph. M. 5 6, 1079 b 
34 TWV ws ytvovs elduv, species in relation 
to a genus. For other views of the con 
struction see Critical Notes. 

9 23 TO d-yair-qTov has been taken 
to mean (i) only, rare, unique; =iwvov 
(Eaton, quoting Odyssey II. 365 fj.ovvos 
fibv aycnrrjTos) : and (2) much desired, 
dearly prized, precious. SUSEM. 

See Cope s note on Rhct. I. 7. 41: /cat 
TO dyaTrrjTov (fj.e i^ov ayadov e crri), /cat rots 
fj.v fj.ovov rot s 5^ /xer a\\wv, where it 
must have the second meaning, as ^m^cus 
in Catullus 64. 215. 

4 1262 a 40 -yewp-yois] Here as 
often the farmers stand for the entire 
third class of citizens in Plato s ideal 

state, TO rwv ctXAwc TTO\LTUV 7rX??#os of 5 
18, all who are neither dpxovTes nor 
eTTLKovpoi; properly including ( 9) rex"t- 
Tctt and all who are engaged in trade as 
well as in agriculture. See 5 20, where 
all are enumerated. The strength of this 
class excites Aristotle s fears : see 5 
19, 20, 22. 

41 XP 1 i <rt ( xov ] Cornrj. vm(v). 11.15 
(Eaton). This section is the only new 
application of the argument in the whole 
passage which follows 3. For the rest, 
5 9 are essentially a repetition, with 
certain distinctive and appropriate nu 
ances, of the objections contained in 3 
4 7 j Y et tnev are not constructed like 
another version simply to supersede them. 
Neither passage gives the slightest cause 
for suspicion of its genuineness. We must 
be content to set down to the occasional 
negligences of Aristotle s style this reite 
ration of a previous line of argument 
without any indication that it has occur 
red before. Comp. n. (164) on 5 14. 
SUSEM. (149) 

1262 b 2 TOIOVTOVS 77TTOV 0lXt/COl/S : 

cp. i. 8 7 n. Plato would altogether 
disclaim such a policy; see Rep. 416-7, 
463 B. See n. on 5 20, 1264 a 27. 

9 25 irepl TOV p,Ta<j>epiv] In 
Plato s ideal state, as children of the 
Guardians grow up they are to be re 
moved into the third class of citizens if 
they appear to degenerate. Conversely 
the rulers are to observe carefully any 
exceptional children of this third class, 

II. 5. 1] 

1262 b 20 1262 b 38. 


26 rv yewpywv Kal re^vtrwv et? roi)? (jbuXa/ca?, rd S eV rou- (I) 
raw et? e /cetVou?, TroXX?}^ ^% 6t Ta P a X ) l v ) riva ecrrai rpoTrov 
Kal ryivwcTKeiv dva^Kalov roi)? ^tSo^ra? /cat jjierafyepovras (P. 25 
10 r/crt rtW? SiSoacriv. en Be Kal rd rcaXai \e%6evra 

30 ejrl rovrwv dvay/caiov (7vjbL/3aiveiv, olov aiKias epwra? 

ov <ydp en Trpoa ayopevovcriv aSeX^oi)? Kal reKva Kal Trarepas Kal 
fjbr)repa<$ 01 re et? roi)? aXXou? TroXtra? ooOevres roi)? (j>v\a- 
tfa? /cat rcahiv ol Trapd rot? <f)v\ai, roi)? aXXof? TroXtra?, 
ware ev\a(Bel(r6ai, rwv roLovrwv n irpdrreiv Sid rrjv crwyyevetav. 

5 Trepi /^e^ ouz^ r^J? Trept ra reKva Kal ra? yvvaiKas 

36 Koivwvias $iwpicr6(jL) rov rpoirov rovrov e^ofjievov II 
8e rovrcov earlv erciaK^aaQai Trepl rfjs 
rpoTrov Set Kara(TKevd^e<rdaL rot? 

28 < 701/3 > ywu 
Koraes || 32 roi)s 

Bernays, perhaps rightly || 31 Trpo<rayopev<rov<ri.i> 
Kas before ot re II 2 Bk.; omitted by M s P 1 || 33 <f>v\at 

H 1 

p 1 II 2 Ar. Bk. 

who as they grow up may display higher 
mental and moral qualities, in order that 
they may be received amongst the children 
of the Guardians and educated along with 
them for duties like theirs. See Republic 

III 415 15, IV 423 C. SUSEM. (150) 

27 iroXXiiv ^x l Tapax^v] Schlosser 
remarks that this requires a more detailed 
proof. SUSEM. (151) 

There does seem some variance be 
tween the rule laid down above, Rep. 
423 C, Tim. 19 A (TO, 5 ruv K.O.KUV els 
r-fjif d\\-r)i> \ddpq. SiaSor^ov -rroXiv, eirav- 
$avofJ,fr(i)V Se ffKOTrovvras del TOVS d^Lovs 
ird\iv dvdyeiv dew, roi)s de Trapd ff<plcriv 
dva^iovs ei s rrjv TUV eiraviovTuv x^P av 
fj-eTaXXdrreLv), and that other regulation 
about exposure Rep. v 460 C (rd de TWV 
, Kal cdi> TL TWV erepwv dvdirTjpoi* 
if ev diropprjTij} re Kal d5rj\a} /cara- 

28 Kal yiv<a<rK.iv KT\] But what 
harm could this knowledge do in the 
case of the children of Guardians who 
were degraded? As to the children of 
the third class adopted as Guardians, 
nothing could prevent the whole body of 
Guardians from knowing in the end that 
they were of different blood. But if we 
assume that all the other institutions of this 
ideal state are practicable, these adopted 
children would suffer no neglect, from 
any one or in anything, on that account. 
SUSEM. (152) 

Aristotle implies that jealousy and dis 

union would follow the recognition of the 

29 Ti<ri rivas 8i86a(ri] This clause de 
pends on yivuGKeiv. 

10 ird\ai = above, I 3. So in 
III. 14. 14 rov TraAcu \6yov, VIIl(v). n. 
24. Obviously Aristotle shrinks with 
horror (as we should) from these crimes 
against blood relations: but there is no 
evidence that it is on the ground which 
Grote ascribes to him, "that serious mis 
chief would fall upon the community if 
family quarrels or homicide remained 
without religious expiation." 

34 w(TT ev\a|3ur9ai] "so as to be 
on their guard," as they might be if they 
used these terms of relationship. 

c. 5 Objections to community of pro 
perty: i 13. See Analysis p. 103. 

1 37 Tiva Tpoirov 8ei KT\] This 
issue is not decided in what follows, for 
the conclusion adopted in 5 8 ex 
cludes the first and third of these alterna 
tives in their application to all the land, 
but does not necessarily exclude the 
second. Later on however, iv(vn). ro. 
10 n. (834), we perceive that even the 
second suggestion does not by any means 
correspond with Aristotle s view, which 
is more like the third, provided it be 
restricted to a part of the territoiy, where 
as Plato had extended it to the whole. 
In Plato s Callipolis the Guardians are 
forbidden the possession of gold and silver 
and of money altogether, and so far they 


nOAITIKON B. 5. [II. 5. 1 

Trorepov KOIVTJV rj //.?} KOW^J (II) 

rrjv dpiarrjv TroXiTelav, 
2 elvai, Tt]v fcrrjcrtv. rovro 

41 rcov Trepi rd re/cva /cal r? yvval/ca^ vevo/jLoOeTrjfAevcov, 

1263 a Se [rd 7Tpl rrjv KTr)<Tiv\ irorepov KOLV y e/celva %a)pL$, KaO^ 

ov vvv TpOTrov %i, Tracn ra? re /erf/Vet? Kowds etvai {3e\- 

TLOV Kal ra? yp^cret? * * , olov rd /juev ryr/TreSa vcopt?, TOU? oe 

39 17 fj.7] Koivty after etvat M 8 ? 1 . In P Set was perhaps repeated before etrat || 
[-rrorepov 40 KTTja-iv] ? Schmidt and then a colon after vevofj-odeT-rj/n^uv 

1263 a i [rd Trepi ryv KTrjcnv] Susem. || 2 irdcras P Susem. 1 2 Freudenthal (per 
haps rightly), iraauiv M s || Tracrt <rds /cr^crets 77 rds XP 7 ? " 6 5 7 7 > T( * s or ""^cri <rds 
Xp7?<rets 77 rds /cruets 77 > rds Spengel, * * rds Susem. 1 2 |l re] 76 Koraes Oncken 
Bernays which gives no sense || XP 7 ? " 6 5 xoivas elvai /SeArtov 77 rds /crrycrets Koraes 
Oncken || 3 /cat] 77 Schlosser Koraes Oncken, /card Bernays || XP 7 ? " 645 < 7M^as 
rds KTrjcrecs rj rds xP 7 7" ets> Freudenthal, xP 7 ? <rets< ) 7 TC * S /cr?7 crets ^bvov 17 
rds xp ? 7 (7ets> Busse, xp ^ (re ^ <r)> Heinsius Hampke 

without settled and independent house-^ 
keeping of one s own. Here he is not so 
consistent as Plato, which is easily ex 
plained however by the fact that his 
whole economic theory rests upon the 
basis of slavery in the genuine fashion of 
anTiquity, of Greek antiquity especially. 
And one consequence of this is that, as 1 
Oncken again justly observes, his con 
ception of property does not involve that 
of personal labour. On this point see 
Introd. p. 27. SUSEM. (153) 

39 TToXireiav] Cognate accus. after 
?roAtreue<T#at. The phrase recurs VI (iv). 
i. 4. We find KaO as TroAtreuoj rat, 1 1. 
7. i; the accusative in I. u. 13 raura 
TToAtreyoi rat, and in rd Trpos avrovs II. 7. 
14, is not quite similar. 

2 40 x w P us ffK\pa.LTo OTTO] sepa 
rately from = independently of. Comp. 
Plato Phaedo 98 C 5ta0uds e x 6 X w /^ s a7T 
dXArjAwz , "to separate them." This is 
the sense of dVo in a7ro0acrts, negative 
predication, 5t ypri/dvov rou 6^ros as Aris 
totle puts it. Compare rrdppw d0 i]/j.iov 
ProMemsxviu. 10, 917 b 14, and Nic.Eth. 
IX. 8. i ovdev acf) eavrov Trpdrret, nothing 
away from, i.e. unlike, himself. 

1263 a i cKetva \(pC<s = the families 
are separate. 

2 KTTJO-IS )( XPT" 1 S5 ownership, fee- 
simple )( usufruct, income returned. 

3 olov introduces the application of 
the three modes of communism to land 
and its produce. "I mean, (i) when the 
estates are held separately but the crops 
are brought into a common stock for con 
sumption, or (2) when the land is held in 
common and cultivated by the state as 

have no property of their own. Never 
theless the connexion of Platonic thought 
leaves no doubt that the entire body of 
Guardians is the sole proprietor of the 
soil, and that thus they hold landed pro 
perty in common. The farmers of the 
third class are consequently tenants who 
pay a rent in kind for the farms they culti 
vate, this rent being a definite amount of 
the produce supplied to the Guardians, 
who have the other indispensable neces 
saries of life provided for them by other 
members of the third class in lieu of a tax 
levied for protection. Lastly, the com 
mon dwellings and common meals of the 
guardians make community of property 
and community of life amongst them an 
actual accomplished fact. See Rep. in 
416 c, iv 419, v 464 C, and comp. 
Zeller s Plato p. 481 Eng. tr. The ex 
tension of these common dwellings and 
common meals to women is not expressly 
mentioned by Plato, but it is implied in 
his complete equalization of male and 
female Guardians: cp. ;/. (196) and I. 
13. 9 n. (116). Thus, as Oncken I. 183 
justly observes, "Plato has simply 
abolished the possession of capital by a 
theoretical fiat, while Aristotle B. i c. 8 
has done his best to banish it to the re 
motest regions of economic life. Only 
landed property with the income derived 
from it is of any account in their philo 
sophical deliberations." There is this 
difference between them that Aristotle 
believes community of property to be pos 
sible apart from community of families: 
whereas the fact is that there cannot be a 
true marriage in our sense of the term 

II. 5. 3] 1262 b 39 1263 a 11. 233 

KapTrovs et? TO KOIVOV (ptepovras dvaKicrjceiv (orrep evia Troiei (II) 
5 rwv eOvwv), r) rovvavriov rf}v pev yfjv Koivrjv elvai Kal yecop- 
ryelv KOivf), TOV? 8e KapTrovs SiaipelcrOat, TT^O? Ta? t S/a? 
aei? (\eyovrai 8e rives Kal rovrov rov rpoTrov KOIVWVZLI 
3 /3ap/3dpa)v), 77 Kal rd yijTreBa Kal TOU<? KapTrovs KOLVOVS. erj- 2 

pwv [lev ovv OVTWV T&v <y60)p<yovvTG)i> aXXo? av ely Tpovro? Kot 
10 pawVy avrwv S]_ auTOi? ^lairovovvTwv , rd rrepl Ta? 
8v(7Ko\ias. Kal yap eV Tat? 

%w/3is Hampke 

public property, but the produce divided 
for private uses, or (3) when both lands 
and crops are held in common." Of 
modern theories, (3) alone answers to 
what Mill Pol, EC. II. c. i calls thorough 
going Communism : (2) to the milder 
forms proposed by St Simon and Fourier. 

yi]ir8a, plots of ground, farmsteads, 
like otKOTredov, emphasizing the site of the 

4 gvia] Editors refer to Lacedaemon 
( 7) and Tarentum vn(vi). 5. 10. But 
these instances seem hardly sufficient to 
establish the first form of communism : 
and Wvt\i see n. (11), would suggest here 
also non-Hellenic tribes, to whose cus 
toms Aristotle paid considerable attention 
to judge from the fragments of his No/xtfta 
or No ytu^a jSap/3apt/ca ; cp. iv(vil). a. 11. 
That work being lost, the most apposite 
references are from Diodoros v. 44, of 
the Vaccaeans, a Celtiberian tribe : v. 9, 
of the exiled Cnidians and Rhodians who 
colonized the Aeolian isles (Lipari) : v. 
41, of Panchaia, which Strabo thinks a 
fiction. Nearchus in Strabo xv. i. 66 
testifies to the custom amongst certain 
tribes of India. Further, the prevalence 
formerly of this system of land-tenure 
would serve to explain crwairta. 

7 rives] On this second system, if 
the soil is to remain common property 
there must be a periodic partition, such 
as is in force even now in Russia, in some 
Swiss cantons (e.g. Glaris) and amongst 
the village communities (dessas) of Java. 
This was the characteristic feature of the 
German mark, first known by Caesar s 
account of the Suevi (Bell. Gall. VI. 29). 
Strabo VIII. 6. 7 affirms it of the Dalma 
tians, and the Greek settlers on the Aeo 
lian islands finally adopted this plan, 
Diod. v. 9. In fact, "there appears to 
be no country inhabited by an Aryan 
race in which traces do not remain of the 

ancient periodical redistribution," which 
preceded and at length ended in per 
petuity of occupation : Maine Village 
Communities p. 81. To collect these 
traces is the object of M. de Laveleye s 
Primitive Property: see pp. 109, 1456. 
(of the English trans, by Marriott). It 
was a modification of this second system 
which appears to have prevailed among 
the Village Indians of North America at 
the time of its discovery. They still 
held lands in common : the lands of each 
Aztec "group" could not be alienated. 
They constructed joint-tenement houses 
and lived in large households composed 
of a number of related families, some 
times fifty or a hundred families together : 
and there are grounds for believing that 
they practised common living in the 
household : i.e. something analogous to 
avcrffiria ; L. II. Morgan Anc. Society 
pp. 187, 200 ff., 535538. 

3 8 T pa)v] a distinct body. CLVTWV = 
the citizens themselves ; O.VT&V avrois 
d<.airovovi>Twv = w\\en they are avrovpyoi, 
Thucyd. I. 126. 

"This remark is quite true in itself, 
but it makes for Plato rather than against 
him. His guardians are a distinct body 
from the yewpyoi and are thus in the posi 
tion described as most favourable to com 
munism" (Oncken). SUSEM. (154) 

10 TO, Trepl TOLS /cnjcreis is nomin., the 
subject of a.v Trap^xoi and not the object 

n. " For where all have not equal 
shares in enjoyment any more than in 
work, indeed have very unequal shares, 
dissatisfaction must needs be felt with 
those who have much enjoyment and 
little labour, by those who get less and 
have more work to do." This is the 
standing difficulty of communistic schemes, 
see Mill Pol. Econ. n. i 3. 



[II. 5. 3 

Kal ev Tot9 epyois ^rj yivofjbevwv LCTCOV a\\ avicrwv avayKaiov (II) 

14 Ta?] TroXXa, oXf/ya Se TrovovvTas TOt9 eXaVra) f^ev \a/ui(3dvovcn, 
4 TrXeiw Be TTOVQIXJIV. 0X0)9 e TO crv^rjv Kal Koivwvelv TOOV dv- 3 
TrdvTwv yaXeTroV, /cat fJudKiaTa TWV TOIOVTWV. 
al TCOV o-vva7ro$r}fJLU>v KoivwviaC a^eoov yap ol 
TrXetcTTot $iacf)ep6/jievoi eK TWV ev irocrl Kal eK fiLKpwv nrpoo-- 
KpovovTes aXX^Xo/,9. eVt Se TCOV OepajrovTcov TOVTOIS yu-aXtcrTa (p- 29) 
20 7rpo(TKpovo/jLV ot9 7r\elcrTa TTpoo ^pw/jieOa 7r^)09 T9 $LaKovla$ 
5 T9 eyKVK\lovs. TO (juev ovv Koivas eivau TCLS /cr^<ret9 1 TavTas 
T6 Kal aXXa9 ToiavTas e^et Svcr^epela^ ov 8e i^O^ Tpojrov 4 
eyet [/cat] eTr LKOCT ^r]0 ev Weal Kal Ta^ei vofjiwv 6p0oov, ov /JLL- 
Kpov dv SieveyKai. efet ydp TO e d^oTepcov dyaOov. 
25 \eyco Se TO e d^KJ^OTepajv TO GK TOV KQivds elvai T9 KTTJ- 

12 dXX dvlffuv omitted by P 2 - 3 Q b T b U b Ar. Aid. Bk. and P 4 (ist hand; added in 
the margin) || 13 [TJ \a/j,j3dvovTas] Congreve, ^v rj Xaytt/Sdvovras omitted by U b Aid. 
|| 1 8 5ia<pepovTai. Koraes || irpocrKpovovai for -jrpoffKpovovTes Congreve || 20 
P 1 || 22 vuv after Tpoirov ZX L M s P 1 || 23 /cat after 2% et omitted by II 1 
n 2 Ar. Bk. 

might be made. The principle of private 
I property has never yet had a fair trial in 
)any country." 

8v Be vvv rpoirov KT\] 8^ Tpbirov vvv 
%X i with the epexegetic ejrLKoo fj. rjdev KT\ 
is the subject of 5tez>^y/cat : " the order of 
things at present existing if improved by- 
good manners and the enactment of wise ; 
laws would be far superior ": de<n, some- j 
what wider than morality, see 15; ways, I 
habits, instincts. 

" This is in reality not so much proved 
as stated ; still it is not laid down simply 
on the strength of 4. Oncken i. 184 goes 
decidedly too far in saying the attacks on 
community of property lack all precision 
and point, and that the doctrine is not 
refuted on its own merits like the com 
munity of families. He fails to notice 
what is pointed out by Zeller Platonic 
Studies p. 289 that the words of 6 all 
will thrive better under a system of private 
property because then each one labours 
assiduously for his own advantage 
apply to property exactly the same argu 
ment which was used with most effect to 
refute on its own grounds community of 
wives and children and was for that reason 
twice advanced, 3 4 7, 4 48 . 
(149)." SUSEM. (156) 

4 15 Koivuveiv governs rQ>v 

&V iravTuv ; "to share in all relations 
of human life, especially such as affect 

17 cruvairoS qiJi.ttv] JV. RtJi. vni. 9 
4, 5 ; avfJ.TTOpevovTa.1 yap ewi TIVL avfj,- 
(pfpovTi, /cat Tropi^o/nevoi rt TUIV els TOV fiiov. 

1 8 8ia(|)p6(avoi...Trpoo-KpotioVTes] Par 
ticipial construction with ellipse of copula, 
as perhaps in I. 5.9 al<rdav6/JLeva. 

TCJV cv irocrl] things near at hand, im 
mediately before us : Herod, ill. 79 : 
KTLVOV T&V /J.dywi TrdvTa. TWO, TOV ev TTOCTI 

Trpoo-KpotiovTcs] Comp. TV. Eth. ix. 4 
i, T&V <j)l\uv oi Trpocr/ce/c/aou/c ores = friends 
who have broken with each other. 

20 rds 8. rds e < Y KVK ^^ ovs ] ^ or the daily 
round of services. Cp. I. 9. 9 (Eaton), 
also II. 9. 9 n. 291. SUSEM. (155) 

5 22 oXXas Toiavras] Aristotle 
never urges (i) that communism will 
diminish the efficiency of labour, nor (2) 
that it will relax the checks on an increase 
of population. The Hellenic idea of the 
omnipotence of the state precluded these 
objections. The conclusion at which he 
arrives is endorsed in the remarks of Mill 
Pol. EC. ib. p. 128: "We must compare 
communism at its best with the regime of 
individual property, not as it is, but as it 

IL 5.7] 1263 a 12 1263 a 36. 

KOI TO 6K TOV I8la<{. $61 jap 7TW? //,< 

is, oX? (II) 

6 S fc Sta?. al jjiev <yap eVt/zeXetaf ^ir^p^fjievai TO, 

?rpo? a\X?;Xoi;? ou Troirjcrova-iv, paXkov Se eVtSwo-oucrt^ a;? 

tStot 6fcdcrT(t) TrpoaeSpevovres* Bi dperrjv & earou Trpo? TO 
30 cr#at Kara- TT)^ irapoifjiiav icoiva ra $i\wv. ecrrt Se /cat 

roz/ TpoTrov TOVTOV ev vai$ 7ro\crLV ovTCD? 

a5? ou# oi/ a&vvarov, KOI paX-Lara ev T6U 
7 ra yu-ez^ ecrrt ra Se <yevoiT aV ISlav >yap efcacrTos rr)v 

e^wv ra jjuev %pijai/jLa iroiel rot9 c/nXoi?, rot9 Se 
35 /consols, olov teal eV AaKeSafaovi, rot? re SouXot? 

rot? aAA^Xcoy a5? eiTrelv ISlois, ert 8 tTTTTOfl? /cat tcwiv, /cap 

28 /mXX^re? Susem. || 29 e/cdcrrou TrpocreSpeiWros P 1 H 2 Bk. (perhaps rightly) || 
33 ytvoir ? Susem. || 35 cos /cotrois Susem. 1 2 , tamqiiam William || 36 ws eiri-rrav 1 
Susem. u>s a s iraaav ? Schmidt, ws [etVeti ] Giphanius, ucrirep ? Koraes || av (?) F 

the main he stops short of the actual 
facts as presented in Sparta particularly, 
whereas Plato set out from these Spartan 
institutions, but only to go far beyond 
them. It is also justly observed by 
Oncken I. 183, that in general wherever, 
as was the case in Greece, the freemen 
are principally supported by the labour of 
strangers who are not free, there the 
ruling caste as a whole stands in a certain 
communistic relation as opposed to the 
servile caste. Compare further n. (166). 
SUSEM. (158) 

35 olov KCU ev AdKeScufJiovi KT\] 
Xenophon De Rep. Laced. 6 3, 4 
relates in the main the same facts, first, 
as to slaves and helots; and as to 
horses, with the more precise limitation 
that a sick man or any one requiring a 
carriage or desirous of travelling rapidly 
to a given place will, if he sees a horse 
anywhere, take it and after using it return 
it faithfully unhurt. As to dogs, he still 
more definitely restricts this usage to the 
chase. Those who require the dogs in 
vite their owner to go hunting ; while he, 
if he has not the time, readily sends 
them off with the pack. There is no such 
information in Xenophon about produce 
growing in the fields : what he does say 
is that after a meal in the country people 
left the remainder of the food they had 
prepared in store-chambers : others, de 
tained while hunting and in need of food, 
might, if they had no provisions with 
them, break the seals of these store- 
chambers and take what they required, 
leaving the rest behind and replacing the 
seal. SUSEM. (159) 

26 For o\(os = in general, almost like 
<x7rXu;s, comp. III. g. 4, VIIl(v). i 3, 
1 J 3 where it is opposed to /card TL a c 
here to TTWS. 

6 27 The division of attention will 
remove mutual dissatisfaction : the ar 
ticle implies those grounds of complaint 
specified above. Each will set about his 
own task, e.g. the cultivation of land. 

29 81 dpr]v KT\] Public virtue will 
ensure that, as the proverb has it, in all 
that relates to use friends go shares in 

"Comp. iv(vn). 10. 9 with n. (831). 
Giphanius observes that this favourite 
maxim of the Pythagoreans is purposely 
introduced here because Plato (Rep. iv 
424 A) applied it to the absolute com 
munity of property. It is not Aristotle, 
however, but Plato who misconstrues it : 
in fact after the latter had misinterpreted 
it, the former restores it to its original 
sense. See Zeller s Pre-Socratics I. p. 345 
n. i, Eng. tr." SUSEM. (156 b) 

31 v tvfous iroXto-iv] See the com 
mendation passed on the Tarentines, 
vm(v). 5. 10. SUSEM. (157) 

inro-ye ypa K p.evov] prescribed, laid down 
as a rule to follow. Often in Plato. 
Eaton refers to Lawsv 734 E, v6fj.ovs TroXt- 
refrus V7roypa<pLV, Protag. 326 D ij TroXts 
v6fj.ovs inroypa^acra ; add Repub. 424 A, 
449 C. 

32 ws = implying that. 

33 rd jx^v...Ta 8] either is or might 
become. j-<^w- - 

7 34 TOIS 8* XP *i Tai KOIVOIS] 
Here even Aristotle s political theory 
has a certain dash of socialism ; only in 



[II 5. 7 

8 $7i0co(Tiv efaSiayv, <rot?> eV rot? dypois Kara rrjv ^wpav. fyavepov (II) 
Toivvv OTL fte\Tiov elvai pev l$las r9 Krrjo-eis, ry Se xprf- 
crei Troielv KOIVCLS OTTO)? Se ^ivwvrai TOLOVTOL, TOV vofjioOerov 
4 TOUT epyov iSiov earlv. en Se KOI TT/OO? lySovrjv d/juvO^Tov OGOV 6 

Sia(f)epei TO vo/Jbi^eiv iSiov ri. ^rj <ydp ov fjiar^v rrjv 
1263 b avrov auTO? e X el/ fy ^av ekao~To<^, a)OC O~TL TOVTO (fo 
9 TO Se fyi\avTov zivai tyeyerai, St/caico? ov/c eo~TL Se TOVTO TO 
(f)i\eiv eavTov, a\\a TO fj,a\\ov rj Sel fyCKeiv, KaOdjrep 
icai TO (^ikoxp^fjiaTov, eVel <f)i\ovcri <ye TrdvTes co? elTrelv 
5 e/cao-Tov TOOV TOIOVTCOV. d\\d i^rjv KOL TO yaplvavQai KOI 
/3or]0fjcrai 0tXot? r; %evois rj eTaipois r]icrTOV o <ylveTai T^? 
10 KTijaecos ISias OUCTT;?. TavTa T6 Srj [ov] avfjiftaivei Tot? \iai> ev 7 

Trjv TroKiV, 
dpeTalv fyavep&s, 

KOI TTyoo? TouTOt? dvatpovcriv epja $VOLL> 
JJLGV [TO] irepl Ta? 

37 e0o5iwz>] pro viaticis William || <roij> or <7ra<rt ro?s> before /cara 
Sauppc, before ev Susem., <rois> iv had also occurred to Vahlen, Ztschr. f. a 7 , ostr. 
G. XXV. 1874. p. 487, [ev] TOIS (Hypols Oncken, [ev] TCUS ayopcus Bernays, <ra/xei ots> 
ev or <To.fjudots> ev v. Leutsch, eV rats dypcus Busse and Ridgeway independently 
|| xupw] Oripav Biicheler, perhaps rightly 

1263 b i O.VTOS omitted by II 1 || 3 TO omitted by Q b T b U b and P 2 (ist hand; 
added by corr. 3 ) || 4 /cat TO P 1 Ar., /cat rbv T M 8 P 2 3 4 Q b T b U b , TO?/ Aid. || 0tXo- 
XpyfJ-aTov <Kal TO <pi\6Ti/moi > ? Koraes, accepted by Bernays || 5 ^/cacrros P 3 4 
Qi, T bTjb Alde and pa ( Ist h anc j; emended by corr. 3 ) || 6 ergots II 1 Susem. 1 2 || 
7 ou after 5?} omitted by II 1 || g TO after p.ev omitted by II 1 , r<p Bernays 

8 39 TOIOVTOI sc. otot T-TJ XP 7 ?"" 6 
Troi?v KOLvds. Above 5t dpeTr)i>. 

vo[j.o0Tov ?PYOV] Undoubtedly Aris- 
totle hopes for results of human legisla- 
tion which now we only expect from the 
training of the conscience by morality 
and religion ; see on 9 12 . (296). 
Herein he agrees with Plato; not how- 
ever, like him, from any denial or under- 
estimate of the rights or power of indi- 
viduality (Oncken). See notes (161) and 
(162). SUSEM. (160) 

40 ?TL 8e KT\] "Again, even to the 
pleasure we feel, the difference that it 
makes to call a thing our own is unspeak- 
ably great." An expression like ovpavLov 
ocrov, 6avfj.d<Tiov offov, nimium quantum. 

41 [ir\ ydp ov fiaTt]v] By fj.7) or fj.rj- 
Trore with the indicative, no uncertainty is 
intended ; ibi quoque adhibita reperitur, 
ubi res affirmatur non negatur. " It may 
well be that our love for ourselves is not 
without a purpose." ^ 

9 1263 b 2 OVK &TTI 8 TOVTO] 
Comp. Nic. Eth. ix. 8. i, 1168 a 28, 

Rhet, I. n. 26, 1371 b 18; also Plato 
Laws v 731 D (Eaton). Congreve quotes 
A^ r. Eth, IX. 4. i, where even friendship 
and benevolence are reduced to forms of 
self-love, ra 0tXt/ca rd Trpbs rot)? 0t \ous... 
eoiKev e/c r&v Trpos eauroi e\rj\vdei>ai. 
SUSEM. (161) 

3 KaQairep KT\] "just as the love of 
money means to love it more than is 
right": PI. Rep. I 347 B r6 (piXdpyvpov 
elvai. &Wt5os Aeyerat (Vettori). Comp. 
also Nic. Eth. iv. 4. 4, (pepo/Aey TO 0iX6- 
TL^OV eircuvovvTes /j.ev eiri TO fj.a\\ov r) oi 
TroXXot, ij/yoi>Tes de ewl TO yttaXXof 77 del. 

10 7 0-vjj.pcUva] of awkward con- 
sequences involved in a theory: av^aL- 
vew dicitur ubi factis ex aliqua hypothesi 
conclusionibus ipsa hypothesis refutatur 

8 dvaipouffw Hpya.] "destroy the func- 

9 o-wcf>poo-i5vT|s] Even Zeller Phil. d. 
Gr. II ii p. 697, n. 7, thinks this an unfair 
objection, because in Plato s common- 
wealth a guardian is bound to continence 

II. 5. 12] 

1263 a 37 1203 b 22. 



15 TTJ 

10 (epyov yap Ka\ov tiXXorplas ovcnjs aTre^ecrOai Bid (ra)(f)po- (p. 3) 
crvvrjv), eXevOepioTijTO? Be [TO] Trepl T<? /cr^o-et? (oure yap ecrrai 
cfiavepos e\ev0epto<> wv, OVTC Trpd^ec Trpd^iv e\ev6epiov ovBe- 
ev rfj <ydp xprjcrei TWV KTTJ fidrwv TO TTJS eXevOe- 

epyov ecrrtV). ) euTrpocrwTro? fjiev ovv j] TOLCLV- 8 
vo/jioOecria KOI fyiKdvOpwjros dv elvai Bogeiev 
<ydp dtcpow/jievo^ dcrfjievos aTroSe^erat, VO/JLI^COV ecre- 
i (>i\Lav Tivd OavfJiacrrriv TCCLGI TT^O? aTrai Tas, d\- 
re Kal oTav /caTyyopf) rt? TWV vvv VTrap^ovTcav 
ev rat? iro\iTeiai^ tcatcwv w? yivo/jievwv Bid TO fjbrj KOL- 
10 vrjv elvau TTJV ovcriav, \eyo) Be Bl/cas re TT^O? d\\rf\ovs 
Trepl <jv fju[3o\aiwv Kai tyevBo/jiapTVpiwv Kplaeis real r jr\ov<Tiwv 
12 KO\aKeias. wv ovBev yiveTai Bid TTJV d/coivcovrjcrlav d\\do 

n e\ev8epi6Ti>)Ta P 1 , e\evQep<.bTa.Ta M s || rb after 5 omitted by II 1 , rw Bernays 
|| 13 rrj after 70,^ W b Aid. Bk. and perhaps Q b || 15 dv after elvcu do^eiev M -s P 1 || 
1 7 riva (n.vl M 8 ) before (piXiav M s P 1 

in respect of all women to whom he is 
not married by the authorities, the Pla 
tonic community of wives being the very 

, reverse of free indulgence of the appe 
tites. Quite true : but then neither is this 

the point of Aristotle s objection. What 
he urges is that voluntary self-restraint, 
which is nowhere possible save where 
monogamy is established, and in Plato s 
state is out of the question, alone deserves 
the name of continence, ffufipoavvri. We 
must admit with Oncken that he is right 
in this, and that g, 10 make an espe 
cially agreeable impression, as a defence 
of the individual s moral freedom. Fur 
ther, see n. (106 b). SUSEM. (162) 

10 fyryov KaXov] Strictly, a goodly 
deed, fair to contemplate ; then a moral 
action (since the motive makes the act 
virtuous; it must be done rod KO\OU 
ft e/ca), with that peculiar implication of 
nobleness which runs through the NIC. 

12 irpfi^iv eXtvOe piov] for which 
private property, e.g. money, is required. 
Comp. Nic. Eth. x. 8. 4 TUJ ^v eXevdepiy 
Se-fjffec ^prifjia.TWv TT/JOS TO irpaTreiv TO. e\ev- 
6tyia ib. 7. Can we ascribe acts of 
liberality to the gods? rivi 5e duaovffiv ; 
droTTOv 5 el Kal &rrcu avrois v6fj.iff^a rj n 

13 v TTJ -ycLp XP 1 1 O "I...I4 ^p^ov to-ri] 
for the use of one s possessions is the 
field for the exercise of liberality. Cicero s 
usus Dirt u fis, 1. 38 is analogous 
to fy-yov in this sense. 


11 17 <|>iXCav rivet, 0avfj,aom]v] 
Comp. Dante Purgatorio xv. 55 57, 
che per quanto si dice piu linostro, | tanto 
possiede piu di ben ciascuno, | e piu di 
caritade arde in quel chiostro; 73 75, 
e quanta gente piu lassu s intende, | piu 
v e da bene amare, e piu vi s ama, | e 
come specchio, 1 uno all altro rende. 

aXXws T Kal orav KaTTcyoprj TIS] Here 
he evidently has in mind Plato s expres 
sions, Republic IV 425 c: rl 5^, raayopaia 
re TrtpL /car ayopav e/cao-rot a 
vfi(3a\\ov<riv . . .TOVTUV roX- 
TL vo/Jioderelv ; 464 D 5t/ccu re Kal 
e y/cXTj/x.ara Trpos aXX^Xous OVK oi^ijcreTai e 
avTijoV) cl)s ^TTOS etireiv, 8t.a TO fj.f}8i> idiov 
eKTTJcrdai TT\TJV TO aw/ma ; Although not 
precisely the same evils are enumerated 
there and here, nor expressly derived 
from the institution of private property, 
yet in fact Aristotle s words quite accord 
with the view of the Republic. Comp. 
20, 21 with nn. (174, 175). SUSEM. 

Add Rep. 465 C : ra 76 /Jirjv ff[j.iKp(>Ta.Ta. 
TWV KaKuv OKVW Kal \eyeLi> uv dinj\\ay- 
^VOL &v dev, KoXaxeias re 7rXou<nW [TT^T;- 
rej] cnropias re Kal a\yr)56vas 6<ras eV... 
5ta Tpo(f)r)v ot/cerwi avayKaiav 
i, TO, p.kv 5avei6/J.ei>oi, TO, d e^apvov- 
Eaton quotes Aristoph. Eccles. 
657 sq. 

12 22 wv ovS^v ylvtroii] This is 
begging the question, though it may 
fairly be surmised that communism would 
not cure all these evils. 


nOATTTKflN B. 5. 

[II. "5. 12 



eirel real TOI)? KOIVCL KeKT7]^evov^ KOI KQL- 
afyepojJievovs fjua\\ov opcS/juev rj roi)? %<w/ot? 
25 ra? ova-las eftovras d\\d OewpovfJiev o\lyovs rovs ere TGOV KOL- 
VWVLWV Bi,a$>epojj,evov<; trpos TroXXot)? o-v/jL^d\\opres TOVS /ce/crrj- 
13 jjievovs l$la rds KTijo-eis. ert Se Sl/caiov JJLTJ povov \eyeiv 

oo~d)v areprjcrovrai KCLKWV KOivwvijcravTes, aXXa Kal ocrcov 
dyaOcav (fralveTai, 8* eZz^at ira^nrav do~vvaros 6 jBios. 
30 alriov Se TW ^coKpdret, Trjs TrapaKpov crews %pr) vo^i^eiv 
14 Tr]v V7r60eo~iv OVK ovcrav opOrjv. 8et jjuev <ydp eivai TTCO? fjiiav 
fcal rrjv ol/clav real rrjv iroXiv, aXX ov nravrir]. ean JJLGV rydp o$? 
OVK O"rai. Trpoiovcra . TroXt?, ecrrt 8 w? corral IACV, eyyvs 8 oixra 
rov fjiT) TroXt? elvai; ^eipcov ?roXi9, wcrTrep KCLV el rt? TT)Z/ 
35 av/ji(f)(0viav Troirjcreiev o jJLofywv iav r) roz/ pvOfJiov (Bdcriv 

25 roi)s] rcDf P 4 Q b U b Ald. || 32 Trdi>Tus p 1 H 2 Bk. || tffTcu M 8 and P 1 (ist 
hand) || 33 Walford (as cited by Eaton) transposes TroXts to follow 
/i^j/ || 34 &TTCU was added after eu>cu by Vettori Bk. Susem 1 2 , erit William 

~~ f L j 

who share property quarrelling 
than those who have their 

23 errel Kal TOVS Koivd KT\] "Since 
we see just those people who are joint 
owners and 
far more 

estates separate." Are these the crvvairo- 
drjfjLOL of 4? Or is the reference to com 
mercial partnerships? 

25 cLXXo. 6ewpoi)|Aev KT\] The cases of 
quarrels seen to arise out of partnerships 
are few, it is true ; but then we compare 
them with the large number of those who 
have separate possessions. 

13 29 dSvvaros] Compare Grote 
in. pp. 217 222. "This supposed im 
possibility is the mode of expressing 
strong disapprobation and repugnance. 
Plato s project contradicts sentiments con 
ceived as fundamental and consecrated: 
the reasons offered to prove it impossible 
are principally founded upon the very 
sentiment adverted to. The truly for 
cible objection is the sentiment itself." 
Plato impugns it and declares it to be 
inapplicable to his guardians: amongst 
whom as he conceives, a totally different 
sentiment of obligation would grow up. 
Similarly "if Sparta had never been 
actually established and if Aristotle had 
read a description of it as a mere project, 
he would probably have pronounced it 

30 irapaKpovVews] "fallacy" as in 
De Soph. El. 17 3, 175 b i, Demosth. 
c. Timocr. 194, 760 27 0ei>a/a0 /u.ou Kal 

3i T]V vir60<riv KT\] the incorrect 
ness of his first principle: see 2 2. 
Comp. Grote in. p. 215 f. 217 ., who 
from Aristotle s own admissions v(viii). 
I. 4, cijiLQ. de ov8e XP^I vofjdfeiv avTov Q.UTOV 
nva elvdL T&V TroXiTuSi , dXXd Trdvras TTJS 
Tro Xews fj.6pi.ov yap eKacrros TTJS Tro Xews, 
and I. 4. 5 TO re yap fnopiov ov /ULCVOV 
d\\ov ecrrl /mopiov, dXXd /cat ctTrXcDs aXXou, 
argues that "the broad principle is com 
mon to him with Plato," though "each 
has his own way of applying it." 

General Objections to the schetne of 
Plato s Republic : 1428. 

14 Here too it would have been as 
well to state that these remarks are nothing 
new, but only a repetition of c. 2, although 
as new points arise out of them (see Ana 
lysis p. 104) there is much greater justifi 
cation than there was in the case of c. 3 
4-7 and c. 4 4-8: cp. n. (149). 

SUSEM. (164) 

33 irpo iovo-a] advancing (to a certain a 
degree of unity), "if its unity be carried I 
far " ; explained by yLvo^vr} fiia fj.d\\ov 
in 2 2. 

34 wo-rrep KOLV KT\] "as if one were / 
to turn the concord of parts into unison,! 
or the rhythm into a single step." Seef 
Probl. XIX. 38, 3, 921 a 2, cru/t^wvt a Kpa- 
crt s e(rrt \6yov e~x6vTwv evavrluv Trpds d X- 

35 (7u//0wi i a = consonance of the toices 
singing one part with the instruments 
playing another : cp. Probl. xi x. 39, 

II. 5. 16] 

1263 b 23 1264 a 4. 


f% 15 d\\d Set , TT\ri6os ov, warrep eiprjrai Trporepov, 8ta rrjv irai- 10 
Sclav KOivrjV Kal fjilav iroielv Kal TOV 76 /LteXXo^ra irai&zicLV 

> / v /> 5> v >/ /I v /^ 

eiaayeiv, Kai vofiL^ovTa oia ravrr)^ eaeauai TTJV Trohiv (TTTOV- 
Saiav, droTTOV rot9 TOIOVTOIS olecrOai Siopdovv, aXXa /AT) rot? 
40 edecri Kal rfj (f)i\o<TO(f)La Kal rot? z o/zot?, wairep rd Trepl 
ra? KTrjcreis ev AaKeSalfAOVi Kal Kprjrrj rot? arvcraiTiois 6 
1 6 16 vop,o6erri^ eicoivwa-ev. Set Se ^Se rovro avro dyvoeiv, ori ^pr/ ( P . 3 i) 

TO) TroXXft) xpovtp Kai rot? TroXXot? erecriv, ev ot? /v^ 1 
\adev, el ravra aXdj9 el%ev Trdvra <ydp 
{lev, aXXa ra /xei^ 01) crvvfjKTai, rot? 5 01) 

39 <deiv> diopdovv Spengel || 40 ^ (9e(ri p 1 

1264 a i eKolvwve P 2 - 3 - 4 and P 1 (corr. ), eKowuisycre M s and P 1 (ist hand) 
II 1 || Bk. 2 omits avrb || 2 ^ea-tv Ar., 20i>e(nv Bernays (hardly right) 

Chappell History of Music pp. n f., 16. 
Whereas in 6/io0owia one or more sets 
of voices or instruments give the same 
noteji. Similarly pv9fj.6s, i) rrjs /co^Tw? 
rd^is "(PL Laws II 665 A), is the orderly 
succession of steps in dancing or notes 
of music of certain definite lengths. The 
unit or element of which long succes 
sions of times are composed is /Sacrts, 
* step in dancing, foot in metre. This 
is clear from Metaph. xiv (N) i. 10, 
1087 b 33, TO 5 v ore [JL^rpov (Trj/maivei, 
(f>ave p6v . Kal ev iravrl ecrrt TL erepovinroKei- 
fj.evov, olov ev ap^oviq. diecris (in music a 
quarter-tone, the smallest interval), ev 
iv 5 pvdfj,ols /Sdcris y ffvX\a(3r). Instead 
of the regular orderly sequence of /Sdo-ets, 
steps in dancing or feet in recitation, 
of various lengths, there will be only a 
single monotonous step or a single beat. 

15 36 irporepov] 58. SUSEM. 

37 KOIVI]V iroietv] widen it so that all 
shall share in it. 

TOV Y e jxeXXovTa iraiSefav KT\] Comp. 
7 8 n. (238), and below 18, 19. 
SUSEM. (165 b) 

39 rots ToiovTois = such direct, com 
pulsory measures, as Plato proposes. 

40 g0<ri, <f>iXoo-o<}>a, VOJJLOIS] Comp. 
<f>v(Tis, Zdos, \6yos of iv(vn). 13. ii n. 
(887). SUSEM. (166) 

4>i\o(ro(|>La] in the wider sense, cul- 
^tur as in 7 12. So Rhct.\\. 23. iTi 6f 
Epaminondas and Pelopidas, perhaps a 
quotation from Alkidamas. An approxi 
mation to Isocrates use of the word for 
literary training. 

rd irpl TO.S KTI]O-IS] Aristotle s fond 

ness for social institutions of the Cretan 
and Spartan type see 7, n. (158) is 
here seen in a new direction, of which we 
shall hear more in c. 9 31 n, (341), 10 
7, 8, iv(vn). 10 9, 10 and notes. 
Compare further notes 168, 192, 208 IT, 
234, 236 b. SUSEM. (166) 

16 1264 a 3 OVK av 2\a0ev] An 
appeal to the evidence of history. It is 
like Aristotle to seek for the doctrines 
he approves some basis in tradition, au 
thority, popular or wide-spread beliefs. 
"An institution which has flourished in 
many different ages and races must pre 
sumably fulfil some want and correspond 
to some deeply-seated instinct." Grote 
rejoins that the same objection (like the 
objection of impossibility) would apply 
to the novelties in his own ideal state. 
But Aristotle might fairly have argued 
that the long time which has elapsed 
without a communistic state makes it the 
less likely that one ever will be estab 
lished, as no originating cause seems 
forthcoming adequate to start it. 

4 ov o-vvTJKTcu] have not been syste- i 
matized. A synthesis is wanting. 

rots 8 ov XP" VTCU ] Much that is 
known is not introduced because it is 
regarded as impracticable. Assuming 
that the earth, and doubtless the race of 
men upon it (8 21 .), has always ex 
isted and always will exist Aristotle 
shares the conviction of Plato and most 
other Greek thinkers that there has not 
been one single historical development of 
humanity, but it has begun and been 
carried on, in a manner similar if not quite 
the same, for innumerable times over and 
over again. Hence to a greater or less 



[II. 5. 17 

17 tyivwcrKovres. [AaXiara 8 av yevoiro fyavepov, el rt? TO 9 ep- 

6 70^9 i$oi rrjv roiavTTjv 7ro\(,Telav /carao-Keva^ofjLevrjv ov jap 

Bwrfcrerai fir) fJLepifav avra KOI ^wpi^wv Troirjo ai rrjv TTO- 

\w, ra pev et9 crvao-lrLa ra o~e et? cfrparplas KOI (f>v\ds. 

ware ovSev a\\o <TVp,(3r)creTai vevo^oOerrujLevov TfXrjv /Jirj ryecop- 

10 yeiv roi)? (fivXarcas ojrep Kal vvv AaKeSai/jiovioi iroielv eTri- 

18 xeipovaiv. [ov ^v aXX ovSe jo rpoiros r^J? 0X77? TroXtre/a? r/<? 

ecrrai rot? KOIVCOVOVCTIV, ovr* etpyfcev 6 ^co/cparr)^ ovre pdftiov 

7 avrtSv Aid., avTyv Thorn., avrovs Backer, av Bernays, d rra Jackson, avriKa 
Welldon || 8 <f>arpias M s P 2 - ;i Q b T b Aid. Susem. 2 - 3 , 0arptds P 1 || 9 <w<5<^ after 
aXXo M S P X |1 10 Kal vvv] roivvv Trieber 

extent everything has existed before, and 
there is nothing new under the sun : all 
discoveries have been already made and 
then lost again, so that they need to be 
rediscovered. See Zeller II ii 792. Comp. 
Susemihl in Jahrb. f. PhiloL vol. cm. 
1871. p. 135 ff.: iv(vii). 10 7, 8 ;/. 
(828). Plato however would have had 
all the more right to reply to this objec 
tion that he himself has but made such a 
rediscovery: that, as Chicken observes, 
he has only followed Aristotle s advice 
and collected institutions hitherto widely 
scattered : that his innovation consists 
solely in this combination of old material, 
as all the elements of his ideal state were 
to be found previously isolated, some in 
Sparta and Crete, others amongst the 
Pythagoreans, and others again in So 
crates. Comp. Zeller s Plato p. 483 f. 
SUSEM. (167) 

This view found a strong expression 
from K. F. Hermann 77ic historical ele 
ments of Plato s ideal of a state > in Gesam. 
Abhandl. VII. 140; "Plato has drawn 
every single feature in his picture of the 
state from the actual political life of 
Greece : he has but applied the abstrac 
tions of science to produce a formal and 
harmonious combination." It is at least 
obvious that the Spartan 0,701777 is, in a 
manner, the true starting-point of Plato, 
as of Xenophon and Aristotle (Grote in. 
209 211); but some caution should be 
exercised in the choice of precedents. 
Thus L. H. Morgan Ancient Society p. 
417 conjectures that the system of rela 
tionship propounded in Rep. v 461 D, 
Tim. 18 C, D was derived from " tradi 
tions not known to us " : and Curtius 
(History of Greece I p. 181 Eng. trans.) 
that the three orders of society Rep. iv 
were adopted from Crete (see n. 818): 
two features of the scheme which bear in 

a high degree the stamp of originality. / 

17 5 TOIS ^p-yois] actually in process 
of formation." The plural is used as 
well as the singular pyu> with or without 
the article, in prose or poetry. 

8 els o-vo-o-iTia] See n. (166). That 
Plato too intended this, was shown in n. 
(153) on i. From the expression here 
and in 15 we might be led to believe 
that this was not the case. Comp. 19 n. 
(170), 24 n. (ryg), 27 n. (184) : 6 
3 (187), 5 n. (195). SUSEM. (168) 

(j>parpias] The form Qarpia (as in 
Aeschines II 147), not <pparpia, is sup 
ported by the Corpus Inscr. Att. n. No. 
599, 1. i with Kohler s remark; Philippi 
Contributions to a history of the Athenian 
citizenship (Bcitriigcu. s. w. Berlin 1870) 
p. 177 nn. 55, 56; Biirmann Three 
Studies in Attic Law in Jahrb. f. Phil. 
Suppl. ix. p. 615. At the same time <pp 
is often written in the cursive MSS. with a 
small hook to 0, so that <p and 0p can 
hardly be distinguished with certainty 
from one another. In such a case there 
fore it may be advisable to depart from 
the one safe principle of following the 
oldest manuscript authority and to retain 
the only rational form <f>p even against 
the codices. Comp. 3 6 n. (141). SU 
SEM. (169) 

10 Kal vvv] Here again, as so often 
in these chapters and elsewhere, vvv does 
not mean at the present time but ac 
tually , and 7Toiiv errixeipovo-iv is but a 
limiting expression for TTOLOIXTLV. 

18 ti 6 rpoiros TTJS oXrjs iroXireCas 
KT\] "has never explained what is the 
nature of the entire polity which (these) 
members of the community share. Yet 
the bulk of the state is made up in effect 
by the bulk of citizens other than the 
guardians." For ol d XXoi TroXtrcu, see 
20, and n. on 4 4. 

II. 5. 20] 

1264 a 5- 1264 a 22. 


el-jrelv. Kairou (r^ov TO ye ir\rj0o^ r^ TroXew? TO TOW &\- (II) 
X*? iro\iT<Sv -/iverai 77X^09, irepl &v ov8ev Su&purnu, 7r6re- 
ispov^ KOI roi? ryecopyoK Kowfo elvai Set T fc /CTrjaei? r, [ K al] 
KdO HtcacrTOV ISias, en & K al ryvvaiKas teal vra^a? ISiovs 
19?) KOivov*. el ^ev jdp rbv avrov rp67rop Koiva irdvra irdv- 12 
TG>V, TL Siofoovo-iv oZo etceivwv T&V $v\aKcov; % ri 7r\elov 

v avrup , j) ri Tra&We? faofwovai 
Idv PJ Tl ao&favrai TOLOVTOV olov Kprjre? ; 
e/ceivoi ydp T(l\\a ravrd TO?? SovXois e^eWe? ^ovov dfa- 
20piJKao-i, ra ryvpvd(Tia Kal TTJV TWV OTrXcov /crfjo-iv. el Se, /ca- 

15 al after rj untranslated by William and Ar. || 16 K <d after 8t omitted by 
19 apxovffi or something similar, in the place of inrotfvowi, Lambin 
Thurot: Bernays omits 18 tf ri 7r\e?o, ...... cx^V with Ar. and transposes 

to follow 20 eM,, || .a.e^re, pi H Bekk. Bernays, but Traces P^ (corr ) 

1 raura P, 7T,ra Ar. (?), Koraes || a0e TO 
P- Qb 1* U* Aid. Lk. and apparently 

and I* (ist hand) | 
P 4 (ist hand), perhaps rightly 

19 17 el fxiv vdp KT\] Aristotle 
might well have spared himself the consi 
deration of this possibility. It is strange 
that he has not learnt from Plato whether 
this third order of citizens is to have 
community of families and of property ; 
whether, in other words, just those 
characteristics which, like their educa 
tion, are distinctive of the two upper 
classes in the ideal state, are to be ex 
tended to the third, or not. It is not 
easy to imagine -a..^trQnger^case"oTi!Sa- 
bihty to" transport oneselfTo an nn. 
ponent s sphere of thought. In fact 
he cannot be acquitted of very culpable 
carelessness in the use of the work he is 
criticizing. As regards community of 
property at any rate, Plato has most 
; expressly said Rep. in 417 A, iv 419 
j that nothing of the kind is to exist 
i amongst citizens of the third class, leaving 
room for no doubt whatever as to his real 
opinion. Nor is Aristotle even consistent. 
For in 4 4 above he has, with better 
reason, raised an objection which is only 
intelligible if these institutions are not 
supposed existing in the third class of 
J^ns- Comp. 24 n. (179); also n. 
(108) and the references there given. 
SUSEM. (170,) 

1 8 i] ri TrXttov KT\] See Critical 

Notes. The sense we require is not, 

what compensation will those receive 

who submit to their rule?" (which is 

repeated in the next sentence), but " what 


advantage will the rulers have over their 
subjects ? " The older commentators en 
deavoured to extract this by taking ro?s 
VTrofj.ei ovcrc rj]v apx^v^To^ vTro/j.ei>ov<riv 
aVx etI/ , " those who undertake to govern." 
But this is against the sense of uTro/xe- 
vovffi in the next clause: "or what in 
ducement will (the rest of the citizens) 
have to submit to them ? " 

20 <ro<jnvTcu] = devise or contrive 

olov KpTyres] See on 9 3 n. (281) 
and Exc. in. This statement is con 
firmed by the skolion of the Cretan poet 
Hybrias there quoted. See also iv(vn). 
10. i n. (820). SUSEM. (171) 

21 TOIS 8ov\ois e<j>e vTs] " while al 
lowing their serfs the same rights with 
themselves in other things, have deprived 
them"...(d7rety077/cacri would be have pro 
hibited ). As we now know, ot /c^es was 
the proper term for these serfs, but they 
are called dov\oi passif/i in the inscription 
of Gortyn. 

"The arguments in 2024 ( ^, 
Kada.Trep...yeupyu)v yvvaiKes) are in the 
main quite correct, but apply just as much 
to Aristotle s ideal state as to Plato s 
(Oncken). Yet see n. (177)." SUSEM. 

Comp. Grote in. pp. 213215, who 
lays stress on the spiritual pride, and 
contempt for the ST^OS, certain to be nur 
tured in the breasts of the guardians. 



[II. 5. 20 

Odirep ev rat? d\\ais 7ro\ecri, /cal Trap 1 e/celvoi? earai ra (II) 
ToiavTd, T/9 6 rpoiros ecrrai rrjs Koivwvias , ev fj,ia yap TTO- 

25 \6L Svo TroXet? dva^Kalov elvai,, /cal ravras virevawrias 
aXX?;Xcu9. Trotet jap rou9 /^ez^ (f>v\aKa<? olov (fcpovpovs, 7-01)9 Se 

21 yecopyovs /cat 7-01)9 re^viras Kal 7-01)9 d\\ov$ TroXtTa?. ery/c\r)- 13 
fjiara Se Kal Sl/cai, Kal oaa aXXa rat9 VoXeo-ti/ virdp^eiv 
(^rjcrl KdKa, 7rdv0 virdp^ei Kal TOVTOLS. Kairoi \e<yei 6 Seo- 

30! tfjoaT??9 W9 oy TroXXtoi SeijcTovrai vo/jiLfjLwv Sid Tr)v TratSelav, 
j oloz; do-TWo/jiiKWv Kal dyopavofjLiKoov Kal T&V d\\wv TGOV 



24 Congreve brackets 

^ aTTocfropdv (pepov- (p. 

20 23 Kivois = rocs aXXots TroXt- 
rcus, the citizens of the third class, rd 
roiavra] family life and separate pos 

24 TLS 6 rpouos TT)S KOivwvias] 
What will be the means of uniting them ? 
How will they associate as fellow-citizens 
with the two upper classes, who have 
such dissimilar institutions ? 

tv [JLia -yap KT\] This is the very re 
proach which Plato levels at the existing 
polities : e/cctcrT?; avr&v 7r6Aets et crt ird/uL- 
TroAXcu, dA\ ov 7r6XiS...5uo ^ev yap KQ.V 
QTLOVV 7, TroXe/ii a dXXvjXoiy, i) /j.ev Trevrjnov, 
i) Se Tr\ov<rlwv Rep, IV 422 E; and VIII 
551 D (Eaton). SUSEM. (173) 

26 olov <}>povpous] Rep. in 415 D, E; 
IV 419 dXX drexj cus, (pair) dV, uffwep e-rri- 
Kovpot /jucrdwroi ev rrj TroXei <pa.ivovTai. Ka- 
6r)<jdai. ovdev dXXo TJ (ppovpou vre s. 
SUSEM. (174) 

27 iroXtTas is predicate : "his citi 
zens are the farmers and the artizans, &c." 
As Grote justly remarks, this is a larger 
and more generous conception of the 
purpose of political institutions than any 
we find elsewhere in Greece, even in 
Aristotle, who sets aside the rest <jf the 
people as not members of the common 
wealth, iv(vn). 9. 3. Plato not only 
treats them as integral parts of the state, 
but in a sense makes them the ultimate 
object of his solicitude. It is for them 
that he sacrifices the private pleasure of 
the guardians, and compels his philo 
sophic rulers to descend into the cave. 
Both rulers and guardians are truly public 
servants, whose duty it is to protect and 
benefit their fellows, Rep. 463 B. 

21 29 cjnjorl] Rep. V 464 D : rl St ; 
5^/cai re Kal yK\-/)fJi.aTa TT/OOS dXX^- 
Xous OVK ol xfiffeTQ.i, e avruv, Cp. n. 

(163). SUSEM. (175) 

Kal TOTJTOLS] just as much to the citi 
zens of Callipolis (ib. odev Sr t VTrdp^et. ro6- 
rots dcrracridcrrots ovffi) ; for by 1. 27 the 
farmers, artizans &c. who make up the 
third class, are citizens. 

Xe -yei 6 2wKp.] Rep. iv 425 c, D : -fj 
Kal TO 7rapdirai> dyopavo/jiiKa d rra ij 
&<TTVVOfJi,iK& T) eXXc/xei i/cd 77 ocra aXXa 
roiaOra, TOVTUV roX^cro/xev Ttvo/Aodereivi 
a\\ ovK^cgiov. Cp. n. (163). SUSEM. (176) 

31 do~Tvvo|Ji.iKwv Kal ayop.] Comp. 
iv(vn). 12. 7 . (865). SUSEM. (176 b) 

" Laws concerning city-police and 
market-police." Dionysius says of the 
Roman aediles (vi. 90) cr%e5dv eof/cacri 
TTWS /card rd TrXeurra rots Trap "EXX^aiV 

32 Take IAOVOV with TOIS (pv\a%w. This 
objection proceeds from an acute appre 
hension that in outward aspect the ideal 
state would not greatly differ from an 
ordinary Greek city, in spite of its stand 
ing army, half Amazons, and its govern 
ment of experienced military officers 
distinguished as savants, who (like the 
Jesuits in Paraguay or the English in 
India) are at another stage of develop 
ment, and belong intellectually and mo 
rally to a wholly different world from 
the mass of the population. 

22 33 Kvptovs ... <J>e povras] How 
precisely the connexion is to be under 
stood was explained in n. (153) on i. 
Practically the result is much as Aristotle 
represents it, and this is certainly man 
aged differently in his own pattern state. 
SUSEM. (177) PI. Rep. v 464 c : 

Trapd T&V d XXw? rpocprji* Xa/xjSdfovras, 
TTJS <pv\aK7)s, KOLvrj Trd^ras dva\i- 
v, IV 416 D, E : rd 5 7riT7j5eta, ocrwv 

II. 5. 25] 1264 a 23 1264 b 7. 

ra9 d\\d TTO\V fjud\\oi> 
35 fjbdrwv TrXr/pew ^ T<Z? Trap 
23 /eal SofXe/a?. aXXa 

e/cos evai, %ae7rovs Ka 

eVtot? L\a)T6ia<> re Kal 

etV dva^Kala ravd* o/zotw? 

- (II) 





rt? 7; 



TOVTWV re 7ro\iTLa /cal 7raio~eia Kal vbfjioi TiVe?. eaTi 
39 evpeiv paSiov, ovre TO Siatyepov fJUKpbv, TO TTOLOVS 
24 TOiyrof? 7T/309 TO <j<wecr$6U Tr]V TWV (f)v\aKO)v Koivwviav. 
1264 bft^ et 76 r9 /Ltez^ yvvaiKas Tcoirjcrei KOivds ra? Se 

IBlas, rt? OLKOvo/jiija-ei, waTrep Ta ejrl TWV dypcov ol dvSpes 

avTwv ; K,av el Kowal al KTijcreis Kal ai TWV yecopywv yvvai- 

/ce9 * *. dTOTrov Se Kal TO 6K Twv 6r)piwv TroieicrOai, TI]V ira- is 

5 pa/3o~\rji>, OTL Sel Ta avrd eTriTijBeiiew r9 ^vvaiKa^ rot9 

25 dvSpcwtv, ot9 oiKovofJiias ovSev yLterecrrt^. eTTfo-^aXe? Se /cat 

rou9 dpftovras co9 tcaOlffTTja-iv 6 ^coKpar^ del yap TTOLGL TOV$ 

35 Trei/icrm as P 2>3 T b || 36 [/cat SouAet as] or /cai <rotai5ras> SouAa as Susem., 
Kat Trepiot/ci as Schneider, /wan as or </cot; / as~> 5ouXetas Schmidt || 37 Siupiffrai 
<KO.I irepi O.VTUI Kal ? Susem. || 39 TTOCOVS TIVO.S P 2 3 " 4 Q b Bk. || elvai <5eZ> 
Scaliger <SeI> eti/at Spengel 

1264 b 3 /ccu/...7Ufa?/ces. These words in II 1 come before 2 wcrirep (p 1 corrected 
this in the margin) : Sylburg and Bk. bracket them ; Schneider and Koraes transpose 
them to precede 2 TI S olKovo^rjcei., Koraes reading i et re for d ye. Thurot first 
discovered the lacuna 

tution and education and code of laws 
are in force in the case of the citizens 
at large." 

^40 sc. 5ta0epet irpos TO cra><r0CH. 
The construction as in i26ob 16 ;/. 

24 ctXXd pr\v KT\] But supposing 
he intends to leave their property in in- 
dividual ownership, and yet to introduce 
community of wives, where are the wo- 
men to be found to superintend house- 
hold matters as the men manage the 
work in the fields? 

"What was said in n. (170) applies 
again to this argument in the mutilated 
state of the text." SUSEM. (179) 

1264 b 4 K TWV 0T]piv] Rep. V 
451 D. SUSEM. (180) 

Troiio-0at rr}v irapapoXiiv, OTL] should 
show by a comparison from the lower 
animals that.... In Rhet. n. 20 2, 5 
7rapa/3oX^ = simile. 

25 7 del yap KT\] In the Plato- 
nic state the government is not actually 
in the hands of the same individuals in 
perpetuity. None except members of the 
highest order, the philosophers, are eligi- 
ble as rulers, but they enter the ruling 
body by rotation. SUSEM. (181) 

1 6 2 

re Kal avdpe ioi, ra^afMtvovs Trapa rCov a\\wv 
TToXtrwi dexeffdai [j,icrdbi> T^S (f>v\aK7Js ro- 
ffovrov offov fj.rire Treptet^at avrols et s rbv 
eviavrov fj,7)re evSelv. 

diro<})opdv] a rent in kind. 

34 \a\eirovis KT\] troublesome and 
full of arrogance. 

35 TO.S irap vtois... irV<rTas] See 
9 2 n. (280). SUSEM. (178) 

36 SovXeCas] Ridgeway Transactions 
p. 132 thinks the word means "the serf 
populations of states like Argos and Crete, 
called Tv^vrjffLoi. at Argos, and 


in Crete," quoting Thuc. v. 23 where the 
word is used of the Helots, r]v d i) 8ov- 
Xda C7raj>t<rr??rcu. So also by Plato, Laws 
776 D of the Mariandyni. 

23 dr dva-yKcua KrX] We are re- 
called to 18 ; the question, trepl wv 
ou5&> diupurrai, is the tenure of property 
amongst the ordinary citizens. "Whether 
it is equally necessary here"< as in the 
case of the Guardians, to have com- 
munism > "or not, has certainly not 
been determined, as matters stand." ravra 
= Koiva. irdvra of line 17 above. 

37 Kal irepl TWV Ixoixt vwv] "Nor 
about the following points : what consti- 



[II. 5. 25 

, TOVTO Se crracrea)? ainov ^iverai KOL^ Trapd (II) 
rot? /jbyev wfjia KeKT7]fjievoLS, iJTrovOev Srj Trapd <ye 6v- 

^oetSe<Tt KOI Tro XefjiiKols dvBpd<Tii>. ort, Se dvay/calov avTu> 
ii Troielv TOZ)? avTOvs dp^ovras, (fravepov ov ydp ore ^ev d\\oi<$ 
ore Be aAAot? fjuefjULtcraL rat? i/rt^afc 6 ?rapa TOI) #eo{) 
cro9, aXV aet rot? aurot?. c^crl Se rot? //,ez/ ev6v<s 
VOL? filial Xpvo-ov, rot? S dpyvpov, %a\Kov Se /cat 
27 rot? TexyiTais fjue\\ov(riv eaecrOai /cal yeoopyois. en Be KOL 16 

dtyaipov fjuevo^ TU>V (frvXatcw, O\TIV facrl Selv 
iroidv r^v 7ro\iv TOP vo^oOerriv. d^vvaTOV Se 

9 rj irovdev Sr, T 3 - fi Q b T b U b Aid. and P 2 (corr.-), ij trovdev 8rj P 2 (ist hand), ^ 
Sr? P 4 , ^Trou^ev 5i) P 1 , etVoufle? 817 TAP, 17 TTO^ 76 5/) Vettori Bk. 1 , ^ ^Oev ? 
Gottling, i) 8f,irov6fr ye Spengel ii 13 5e] 7^ ? Susem. II ev8t H 2 Bk. & P 1 (ist hand) 

9 ai[Jia = dignity, valuation. There 
is no such distinction in Aristotle (as 
there is in Thucydides) between your own 
estimate, aiu<ns, and that of others, 

10 0vp.oiSeo-i...dv8pd<ri] The mem 
bers of the second order of citizens, 
Guardians in the narrower and inexact 
sense ((pv\aKes = eirLKOvpot.) from whom 
the first class (<xpx oj/Tes ) are drafted off. 
For after they have attained the age of 
twenty, only the better qualified amongst 
them proceed to the higher education in 
mathematics; and out of these again at 
thirty only the very ablest receive instruc 
tion five years longer in philosophy (dia- 
\KTLK-/j). Then after fifteen years more 
devoted to practical life, after serving in 
higher commands, they are at length re 
ceived into the highest order, the rulers 
proper: see Rep. vii 536 D ff., comp. . 
(970) on iv(vii). 17. 15 and Zeller s 
Plato p. 480 n. (69). In the Aristotelian 
model-state, however, all citizens in later 
life may attain to a share in the govern 
ment and administration; provided, that 
is, their fellow-citizens elect them to the 
particular offices of state for which they 
are eligible. See on in. i 10 n. (44) 4 
5 (471), J 3 I2 (599) iv(vii). 9 9 
(817), T 3 9 (885) and Exc. i to^ B. 
v(vili). As Eaton remarks, dvfj.oeLdel s 
men of spirit is Plato s own term (Rep. 
Ii 375 B, 3760) for his caste of warriors: 
comp. in. 16 i n. (641), iv(vii). 7 5 
(786), 7 (79). I0 3 (839) *5 9 
(935 SUSEM. (182) 

26 on 8e dvavK. KT\] "Aristotle 
apparently does not observe that Plato s 
myth does not answer its purpose, as it 

does not recognize the promotion of eiri- 
Kovpoi to be 0i XaKes." JACKSON. 

13 <j>T]o-l 8e] Rep. in 415 A. SUSEM. 

v0ijs y tv> ] directly they are born, at 
the moment of birth : evdv of time is not 
good Greek. 

27, 28 This relates to one of the 
most brilliant and striking episodes of 
the Republic: the objection of Adei- 
mantus at the opening of B. iv that 
Socrates has insufficiently provided for 
the happiness of his guardians: 419 
421 c. 

15 gn 8e...i7 vop.o9eVT]v] Here Aris 
totle is guilty of a further piece of care 
lessness. Plato certainly says, 420 15, ov ^r\v 
-rrpbs TOVTO fi\<;Troi>Tes rrjv TTO\<.V old- 
o/j.ev, OTTWS eV TL rj/MV ZQvos <JTO.I 5ia<pe- 
P JVTUS evSai/jiOV, o,XX OTTWS OTL ^dXicrra 
o\?7 TJ TroXts: but Aristotle has not at 
tended to another passage v 465 0466 
B, where this thread is taken up (^/j-vrja-ai 
odv OTL v ro?s TTpbvdev OVK oI5 OTOV \6yos 

7)/UUl> 7TTr\f]^V, OTL TOI>S <f>V\CLKaS OVK 

evoaifjiovas iroioifiev) and to the later dis 
cussion ix 680 692 B, whence it ap 
pears that the former statement is only 
provisionally made. Plato s ultimate de 
cision is the very opposite: that his 
polity is the sole means whereby the 
Guardians can attain to perfect happiness 
(465 D ri<rov<n TOV /ia/captorou /3tou, 5^ ol 
0\v/mTTiov?KaL fwcrt, /m/ca/Hwrepoi ). Thus 
this objection breaks down entirely. We 
have had instances of similar negligence 
already in 17 n. (168), 19 (170), 24 
(179) : and there is another in 6 5 (195). 
Moreover in iv(vn). 9 7 Aristotle him 
self says evoai/uLOva. TTO\LV OVK els 

II. 6. 2] 1264 b 8 1264 b 31. 245 

0X771 , /W-T) TWV 7r\eia-rwv r) [^r/] TTO.VTWV fjbepwv rj (II) 

Trjv evBaifioviav. ov yap TWV avTwv TO evBaL-l 
20 /Jiovetv wvirep TO apTLov TOVTO fj,ev yap evBe^erai rw oXco ; 
VTrdp^eiv, TOOV Be jjbepwv ^BeTepy, TO Be evBaifAoveiv dBv- 
28 va-rov. d\\d fjurfv el ol (j)v\a/ces JJLYJ evBalfjioves, TtVe? ere- 
poi ; ov yap Brj O L ye Te^ylTai teal TO TrXr/^o? TO TWV (Bavavcrwv. 
6 TI fjiev ovv 7ro\LTeia Trepl r}? 6 ^coKpciTij^ elprjKev, TCUVTCL^ III 
25 re r9 dTropias e^ei KOL TOVTCOV OVK eXarrot;? erepa? 1 a"X, e ~ ^ 33) 
Sbv Be 7rapa7r\7](TLa)<; KCU TCI Trepl TOU? FO/ZOU? e^eu TOI)? i/crre- 
pov ypa$evTas, Bio KOI nrepl r% evravBa TroXtre/a? eVt- 
cFKe^aa Ocu, /Ai/cpd /3e\Tiov. teal yap ev Ty TroXtreta Trepl 
o\iywv Tca^LTcav Biwpt/cev 6 ^coKpaTrj^, Trepl re yvvaiicwv 
30 teal TZKVWV KOLvwvias, TTCO? %iv Bel, KOI Trepl /CT?;cre&K, <fcal 
40 <7repl TT)S TratSewi?, Trolav TIVCL Bel ytveaOai TOIV <frv\dKwv,> KOL 
! 31 T//? TroXtrei a? r?)^ TCL^IV (Biaipeii~aL Be et? 8uo /J<epr) TO 

1 8 /r>) Trat-rwj 17 rwi ir\dffTwv fj-epuiv Boiesen || et /UT) Vettori, but then ei /x?; Traf- 
rwi/ should be transposed to come after 19 TLV&V \\ [i^rf] iravrwv Lindau Zeller (P/iil. 
d, Gr. ii ii 698 n. 2) the easiest alteration. Busse transposes the second ^ to 
precede TIVWV || 77 TLVWV omitted by Bojesen || 20 ua-jrep M P 1 (ist hand 
emended by p 1 ), and P 2 (corr. 1 ), wvirep the remaining authorities including F, rendered 
quorum ct by William || 26 rd is omitted by II 2 Bk. || 30 KO.L is inserted after 
TKVUV by II 3 || After /cr^uews Susem. inserts the clause KO! trepl...<f>v\&K(>}v from 
1264 b 40, 1265 a l ; Introd. p. 79 f. || the last /cat] /card 1 Schmidt, accepting the 
transposition || 31 <5e] yap II 2 Ar. Bk. 

Ti j3\^\l/avras del \eyeiv aur?}s, dXX as be genuine. According to Diog. Laer. 

irdvras rous TroXtras : where see note. in. 37 it was published by Philip of Opus 

SUSEM. (184) after Plato s death. 

18 if TIVWV KT\] "or unless at least 28 ircpl oXi-ytov KT\] "has precisely 
certain definite parts," viz. the most im- determined very few things." In this 
portant, "attain happiness." SUSEM. comparison of the Republic with the Laws 
(185) Aristotle s tendency to look for definite 

19 ov yap TWV avrwv XT\] "For results (noticed above, c. 2) is especially 
happiness is not a thing of the same sort prominent. lie is in no way concerned 
with evenness, which may be an attribute to exhaust the differences between the 
of the sum (of two numbers) where it is two polities : indeed the whole discussion 
not an attribute of either of the numbers started with the dogmatic inquiry, what 
themselves." The sum of two odd num- are the limits of community in civil life ? 
bers, 3 + 5, is even. i 2. But one cannot help seeing that 

c. 6 Comparison of the Republic and the deepest ground of this difference, the 

the Laws : 15. Examination of the altered philosophical standpoint and the 

polity proposed in the Laws : 622. change in the conception of the state, has 

_See Analysis p. 104, Introd. p. 33 escaped him: had he clearly recognised 

with notes; Zeller Platonic Studies p. this, he would not have expressed him- 

203 207, and pp. i 144 generally; self as he has in 5 (Zeller). See however 

Oncken i. 194209; Van der Rest pp. 4 (T. L. Heath). 
181 344. 31 TTJV rd^iv] Understand 8iupiKe, 

1 27 vrav9a] In the Laws. though the change of construction is 

Evidently Aristotle assumes the work to unusual. 



[II. 6. 2 

32 7T\7J0os TCOV olrcovvTwv, TO pev els TOVS tyewpyovs, TO Se els TO (HI) 

irpoTToXefjiovv f^epos TpiTOV 8 e /e TOVTGOV TO povKevofjievov teal 
3fcvpi,ov Trjs TToXeo)?), Trepl Se TO>^ yecopywv real T>V 
35 TroTepov ovbe/Jiias r) /jLeTe^ovai TWOS /o%^9, /cat iroTepov 

Set K6KTr}(70ai /cal TOVTOVS fcal cri/^TroXeyLte^ 77 /AT;, Trepl rou- 
T0)z^ ouSez^ SiwpiKev o ^w/cpaT^s, d\\d ra? yu-ez/ <yvvaiKas 
oleTai Sew o-VfJbTTo XeiJielv teal TraiSelas p,eTe%eiv 7-579 

39 Xo7<HS after irei 
ted by IVPP 1 Bender 

Susem. 1 * 3 following William s translation: it is omit 

2 32 For the repetition of els 
compare iv(vn). 14 12, and possibly 
12 6. 

33 irpoiroXejJiouv] Plato s word Rep. 
IV 423 A. 

rpiTOv 8* IK TOTJTWV] Comp. n. 182 
SUSEM. (186). Supply earl. "The de 
liberative and supreme (executive) body 
of the state (is) a third order formed out 
of these latter" He quite correctly takes 
the apxovres to be a committee chosen 
out of the eTriKovpot : specially trained 
military officers, of mature experience 
and of great eminence in science, are 
from time to time coopted into the 
governing order. In the individual soul 
the gulf is fixed between the Aoyi<TTt/coi/ 
and the other two parts which make up 
TO aXoyov : but in the state the wide dis 
tinction is between dpxovres and ewiKovpot 
together, i.e. 0uXa/ces in the vaguer sense, 
on the one hand, and ot aXXoi TroXtrcu on 
the other. 

3 34 irepl 8e TWV Y^cop-ywv KrX] Here 
Aristotle contradicts himself again : see 
on 5 17 11. (168), 19 (170), 24 (179), 
6 5 ( J 95)- For at 5 25 above he 
recognised quite rightly that even the 
members of the second order are to have 
no real share in the administration : 
whereas now he expresses doubt whether 
some part in it may not fall to the third 
order, and whether they too are not to 
go out on military service ! If there is 
one thing which Plato has made clear it 
undoubtedly is his principle of the di 
vision of labour. This, which he puts 
into the foreground, prohibits the shoe 
maker from ever attempting to be at the 
same time a tradesman or a carpenter or 
a farmer: <z fortiori it prohibits the 
artizan or farmer from serving likewise as 
soldier ; and either of them, or even the 
soldier, from ruling. See Zeller Plato p. 
470 f. SUSEM. (187) 

37 ovS^v 8iwpiKv] Yet see Rep. V 

468 A. 

dXXd rds jxev KrX] Consult the note 
following. SUSEM. (188) 

38 o-vjjnroX[j.iv] Rep. V 451 E, 457 

A, 466 E, 471 D. 

39 rots eD0v KrX] But in the Repub. 
Plato treats of the community of children 
and wives v 457 B 466 D, of the regula 
tion of property relations in 415 D 417 

B, of education II 376 E III 412 B, VI 
502 c vii 535 A, x 595 A 608 B, of 
the division into the three orders of 
citizens, n 367 376 E, in 412 c iv 
445 E, v 466 D vi 502 c, vii 535 A 
541 B (comp. II 376 E ill 412 B, VI 
502 c vii 541 B), of the women s share 
in the duties of the guardians v 449 A 
457 B, so that this whole work is literally 
filled with what Aristotle has here cited ; 
only the first two books lay the founda 
tion for it and the eighth and ninth 
enlarge upon the other forms of govern 
ment. Thus independently of the dis 
cussions on the immortality of the soul 
x 608 c 621 D nothing is left which 
could come under the head of these dis 
cussions which lie outside the subject. 
The treatment of the above questions is 
no doubt crossed over and over again by 
dissertations on metaphysics, the theory 
of cognition, psychology, and ethics. 
This is what Aristotle really means, and 
he might from his standpoint consider 
them as not properly belonging to the 
subject. But that is no correct standard 
of judgment. What should have com 
pelled Plato to write a purely political 
work in the Republic? Why might it 
not have been his intention to present a 
work in which the specially political dis 
cussion was only an organic member of a 
more comprehensive whole? SUSEM. 

"In answering the question What is 

II. 6. 4] 

1264 b 32 1265 a 3. 


40 TOP \6yov* Kal irepl TT^S iraiScCas, iroCav rivd 8i Y tv<r0ai ( ni ) 

12 1 4 T " v ^^K^V- TcS^ Se v6fji(i)v TO fjiev Tr\eicrTov yaepo? VO/JLOL 2 

Tvy%dvovanv 6We?, o\i<ya Se Trepl r?9 TroXtrem? elpriKev. KOI 

ravrrjv /3ouXo/^ez>o9 KotvoTepav Troielv rat? TroXeo-i Kara /u- 

40 ro^ X^o^ untranslated by William, Ar., [ro^ XOYOP] Susem. 1 --; but F is uncer 
tain and it is better to follow II 2 , as I now think, or else with M H P 1 to omit \67ots 

the subject of a given Platonic dialogue? 
it is convenient to distinguish the subject 
of the conversation from the subject or 
subjects of the work. Thus in the case 
of the Republic, though the thesis ws a/xet- 
vov 5iKaioff6vi) d5t/a as is the subject of the 
conversation between Socrates and his 
friends, it may fairly be said that the 
work is concerned with the /caXXtVoXts, 
the theory of ideas, and some minor 
matters. It is however the thesis us a/j,ei- 
vov SiKaioavvr) a5u<ias which gives unity to 
the composition. Hence, although one 
of the incidental discussions may have, in 
consequence of its originality, both for 
the reader and for Plato himself (ire pi 
TroXtra as rjv TO K(f>d\atov Timacus 17 c), 
a special interest, it is unreasonable to 
regard what is alien to it as in any way 
irrelevant. In fact Aristotle s remark is 
no more than the expression of his 
characteristic dislike of Plato s indirect 
method of approaching the doctrines 
which he wishes to enforce." JACKSON. 
4 1265 a i TCOV 81 v6|j.wv KT\] 
, This is quite incorrect: in the Laws 
; about equal parts are taken up with 
/ constitutional theory and with legislation, 
[ and the constitution in the narrower 
sense is treated much more fully than in 
, the Republic (Suckow Form der plat. 
\ Schriften 132 f.). Aristotle (n. 466 on 
in. 3. g) agrees with Plato in including 
under the constitution, in the wider sense, 
the regulation of education. From his 
point of view therefore the whole of the 
Laws from the middle of B. v to the end 
of B. vui with a large part of B. xn 
may be said to be irepl TTJS TroXtretas, 
while books IX, x, xi and the rest of 
B. xn are a code of laws, v6/j.oi. SUSEM. 

Oncken (i. 194 199) appeals to this 
passage in support of his view that the 
first four books of the Laws, and part of 
the fifth, are a later spurious introduc 
tion (r6 TrpooLfj,Lov rwv VO/ULUV, 734 E) with 
which Aristotle was wholly unacquainted, 
k 2 Kal TdvTTjv POV\. KT\] "andwhile 
endeavouring to make it more universally 
lapplicable to the existing states he gradu 

ally works it round to the other polity 
once more." KoivoTepa.v = common to 
many states, an average polity. Cp. 16 
and vi(iv). 2. 4. 

" When he wrote the Republic Plato 
looked upon the pattern constitution 
there described as by no means impracti 
cable. He declares that its immediate 
introduction might be secured without 
difficulty under a definite condition, which 
though not indeed easy, nor of frequent 
occurrence, was yet by no means impos 
sible: V47i cf.,473C, vi 497 A f., 499 B 
502 C. In the Republic moreover he 
knows nothing of any pattern state of the 
second rank, holding an intermediate 
position between the first and the existing 
constitutions. But in the Laws he has 
changed his view on this point. The 
form of the state described in the Republic 
(though he still holds it to be the best) is 
an impracticable ideal: v 739 A f. , vn 
807 H, IX 853 C, cp. 874 E f. ; III 691 c f., 
692 15 f. , iv 713 c f . For that reason he 
now replaces it by a second best scheme 
of constitution which approximates much 
more nearly to the actual constitutions, 
not without expressing the apprehension 
that if the attempt were made to call this 
into life much in it would have to be 
abandoned, so that the actual result 
would be only a pattern state of the third 
order: v 739 A E, 745 E if., cp. vn 805 
]3. Here too the possibility of thus rea 
lizing it, though only to a limited extent, 
is made dependent on a condition, very 
similar though not entirely the same as 
the condition which is indispensable for 
the realization of the state planned in the 
Republic-, namely, that it should be un 
dertaken by an absolute prince (rvpavvos) 
with an inclination for philosophy, young, 
of good disposition and as yet uncor- 
rupted, in conjunction with a philosophic 
lawgiver: IV 709 E fT. , v 735 D. Cp. 
Zeller Plat. Stud. 16 ff., Plato (Eng. tr.) 
p. 483, 522 f., 531, 538 f., 546; Suckow, 
op. c. 133; Susemihl Plat. Phil. 1 1. 619, 
German trans, of the Laws 976 ff. Aris 
totle seems to have rightly apprehended 
this relation between the two : at all 



[II 6. 4 

5 Kpov Trepidyei, 7rd\iv 66? rrjv erepav 7ro\iTeiav. e^co yap (III) 
5 T^? T&V yvvaLKCov KOivcovlas /cal r^5? Krrjcrea)?, ra a\\a 


rat? TroXtre/ai? /cal 
TT)V avrrjv, KOL TO rv ep<ywv TWV dvayfcaiwv 

1265 a 4 els] Trpos II 2 Bk. )| 6 didwriv P 4 U b Aid. 


events he gives no expression here to the 
opinion which is supported by many 
moderns, most recently by Oncken op. c. 
I. 201, that the state of the Laivs is only 
meant to be a transitional form to mediate 
and prepare the future introduction of the 
true ideal state, an opinion which is seen 
from the foregoing to be utterly untenable. 
On the contrary his words plainly amount 
to this; that Plato intended in the state 
of the Laivs to frame something inter 
mediate to that of the Republic and the 
existing states, but in reality he has un 
consciously followed the Republic so much 
more closely than the existing states, that 
all essential features of the former are still 
retained." SUSEM. (191) 

5 4 w "yap TT)S TWV yuvaiKwv KT\] 
But supposing what is not indeed the 
case (see next note) that this really were 
the only difference between the two 
schemes, is it not after all one so essen 
tial that any further discussion of a really 
essential identity between them is thereby 
precluded? And so far as this might yet 
be possible, does not Aristotle s ideal 
state come pretty nearly as close to that 
of the Republic as does that of the Laws? 
At any rate, of the three points which 
Aristotle lays stress upon as justifying his 
criticism, he too expressly approves of the 
two latter ones: c. 7 8 n. (238); 9 2 
(279) 3i (340; io8f. (365); ii 10 
(393) : iv(vn). 9 3, 4, 8; 10 9 (831), 
10 (834), Introd. p. 22 n. (3). His own 
ideal of public education also, so far as he 
has developed it, coincides in very im 
portant particulars with the directions in 
the Laws: see on IY(VII). 17 i n. (950), 
15 (970): v(vin). 4 79, nn. 
True, Plato s divergence comes out in 
that dialogue also when he insists on the 
education of women in common with 
men, on their taking part in military 
service and in the common messes, thus 
rendering true domestic life impossible ; 
nor perhaps is Aristotle willing to follow 
him in assigning by law a definite limit 
to personal property: see 15 ;/. (213), 
7 4 . (233). But he, too, demands, 
exactly like Plato in the Laws, that the 
land in the possession of private persons 
should be divided into equal inalienable 

indivisible lots twice as numerous as the 
families of citizens (iv[vn]. 10 911, 
see also nn. on 11. 5 i, 6 15): and 
that for this purpose the number of 
citizens be maintained perpetually the 
same, 10 13, 7 5 iin. He is only 
more decided and consistent than Plato in 
not shrinking in the least from the hor 
rible expedient of abortion, as a means of 
securing this (Introd. 34, 56, IV(YII). 16 
1 5 f. nn. ) ; while Plato, who had made 
the same regulation under certain circum 
stances in the Republic (see on n. 3 5, 
6 n. 140), had in the Laws abandoned it, 
and had left the number of children to 
be produced unrestricted, in the hope of 
adjusting the matter in a milder way : n. 
(208) on 6 10. In this respect then 
Aristotle s ideal state stands even nearer 
than that of the Laws to the state de 
picted in the Republic, and makes a more 
severe and destructive attack upon mar 
ried life. Lastly he too requires written 
enactments fixing the age at which mar 
riage is advisable and compulsory (iv[vii]. 
16 i 10, nn. 937, 940); in fine, 
whereas his view of marriage is wholly 
different from Plato s, and ethically re 
garded a modern view (Exc. I. to B. II p. 
327), it is actually realized in only a very 
mutilated fashion. Thus in criticizing 
Plato he has at the same time uninten 
tionally passed judgment upon himself. 
SUSEM. (192) 

7 ircuStiav T^V avTrjv] This is only 
relatively true. The all-essential feature 
in the state of the Repiiblic is the rule of 
the philosophers; see Zeller Phil. d. Gr. 
II i 761 f. (Eng. tr. Plato 466, 467 ff.); 
and in the Laws this is dropped. Aris 
totle overlooks this fact. Further, in the 
earlier scheme those engaged in trade 
and agriculture are at any rate free mem 
bers of the state : in the scheme of the 
Laws, the former are aliens not settled 
permanently in the country, while the 
latter are slaves: Laws v 741 E ff. ; vii 
806 D ff. ; VIII 842 C f., 846 D, 850 D ; XI 
915 B ff., 919 D ff., 921 c; xii 952 D ff. 
Thus the third class of citizens is done 
away with. The second class is all that 
is left and the training prescribed for it is 
the same only so far as it extends; that 

II. 6. 6] 

1265 a 4 1265 a 13. 


r)V, Ka ^ irepl (TVO-GITLWV cocrauro)? Tr\r)v eV ravry (III) 
(fr rjo l $eii> eivai crfaWrta Kal ryvvaiKwv, KOI rrjv fj,ev yikiwv 

10 TWV O7T\a KKT7]/jieVO)V, TaVTTjV Se 7reVTaKiO"VL\L(i)V. 

6 TO jiiev ovv TrepiTTov e^owi TraWe? ol TOV ^,wKaTOV 3 

\OJOl, Kal TO KO^OV Kal TO KaLVOTOfJLOV Kal [TO] ^TrjTi 

&)? Se TravTa L&COS ^aXeTroV, eVet /cat TO ^uz^ elprjfAevov 

9 /cat before ywantuv omitted by F (?) and by P 1 (ist hand, added by corr. 1 ) || 
12 TO before TJTTIT(.KOV omitted by M 8 P 1 

is, not beyond the elementary principles 
of mathematics: Laws vn. However a 
certain survival of the philosophic rulers 
of the Republic is still retained by the 
formation of a higher council of state, 
the so-called nocturnal assembly. It 
is to consist of the most educated 
and capable men in the community over 
fifty years of age ; moreover certain of 
the most distinguished magistrates be 
long to it in virtue of their office ; while 
younger qualified citizens, if at least 
thirty years old, may be admitted as 
extraordinary members by cooptation, 
and are then instructed by the council in 
its own sciences, philosophy, higher 
mathematics, including astronomy and 
theory of music. But this higher college 
is destitute of political power and is re 
stricted to its moral influence simply; 
it endeavours thereby to guide public 
opinion in such a manner that the elec 
tions to public offices may fall, wherever 
possible, upon its ordinary and extra 
ordinary members. See Laws I 632 c, 
xii 951 D ff., 961 A ff. Cp. n. (970) on 

IV(VII). 17 15. SUSEM. (193) 

Kai TO TWV iipyoiv KT\] Laws v 741 E, 

VII 806 D 807 D, VIII 842 D, 846 D, XI 

519 D f. SUSEM. (194) 

dvcryKaCcov = necessary for support, cp. 
in. 5. 3, iv(vn). 10. 7 where the antithesis 
is to TO, et s eva x r l/^o(Tv^7]v Kal Trepiov<riav. 

8 Kal irepl o-u(r<riTia>v w<ravT<os] Here 
Aristotle is perfectly aware of the fact 
which he appeared to have forgotten be 
fore, 5 17 n. (168), 24 n. (179), that 
even in the ideal state of the Republic Plato 
had required there should be common 
messes for the guardians. SUSEM. (195) 

ir\r\v ev TavTT] KT\] As a matter of 
fact messes common to the women are 
assumed by Plato in the state of the Re 
public^ as was stated in n. (153) on 5 i ; 
but in the changed sphere of the state 
in the Laws he finds himself obliged ex 
pressly to lay down this requirement and 
assign reasons for it, as he intends to 

maintain it in the later scheme: VI 780 I) 
ff., vii 806 E, cp. vni 842 i;, 847 E. 
Further compare I. 13 9 n. (116), n. 7 
i n. (231 b). SUSEM. (196) 

9 x i k" v ] Rrfiib- iv 423 A, where 
however this number is given as only the 
minimum, (is aX^^ios neyiaTij /cat ecu/ 

SEM. (197) Yet Grote (Plato in. p. 206 
n. b) observes that the understanding of 
Aristotle himself on the point is one ma 
terial evidence that this was intended by 
Plato. Comp. Politicns 292 E for the 
possible number of the rulers. 

10 irevTaKKT^iXCcov] More precisely 
5040; Laws v 737 E, 740 c f., 745 n ff. 
etc. SUSEM. (198) 

6 ii TO [lev ovv KT\] "Now all 1 
the discourses of Socrates display genius 
acuteness originality research." TT^PLTTOV, \ 
out of the common, extraordinary: cp. 
Mctaph. I. 2. 13: Ko/j,\j/6v, ingenious, 
subtle, as vi(iv). 4. n /COM / WS TOVTO ovx 
i/ca^cDs <5e et pj/rat. Both better taken of 
the thought than with some editors of the 
style. (Thus Gottling Commentariolum de 
Ar. Pol. II. 3 gives for KO^QV compta 
pulchritude, grace or finish.) 

TOV ZwKpciTOvs] Aristotle then erro 
neously takes the Athenian stranger in 
the Laws to be Socrates, although the 
time of the conversation falls long after 
his death. The eVos should rather be 
considered as personifying enlightened 
Athens. See Susemihl Plat. Phil. 11.667 
ff., Trans. of the Laws p. 998 f. SUSEM. 
(199) Yet all the same this stranger, 739 
c E, apparently assumes responsibility 
for the proposals of "Socrates" in the 

12 KaX<Ss 8^-rrcivTa] sc. ZX LV I for every 
thing to be right: "but to be right on I 
all points may well be a hard task." x a - 
XeTra TO. /caXd. Bernays however renders 
Xa\e7roj = too much to ask. 

13 TO vvv tip. 7r\T]0os] The con 
struction changes ; he begins as if Several 
were to follow. 



[II. 6. 6 

$i fir) \av6aveiv on %Gdpas Secret rot? Tocrovrois B<z/3uXaWa9 (III) 
B rj TLVOS XX?79 (iTrepavTOV TO TrXrjOos, e 779 dpyol TrevraKi- 
<ryi\iQi OpetyovTai, KOI Trapd TOVTOVS yvvaiKtov KOI OepaTrov- 
7 TWV ere/)09 0^X09 7ro\\a7r\do-io$. Sel fjbev ovv VTTOT Idea Oat, (p. 34) 

j^ev [ikwroi a^vvarov. \eyerat S c9 Sei rov 4 
jv 7T/309 3uo fB\e7Tovra TiOevai 701)9 VO^JLOVS, irpos re 
20 TT^ wav /cal rovs avOpwjrovs. ert Se /caXw9 e^et Trpo&Oel- 

eu%as etpyK&at, dXXd ^aXeTrd /cteV, dvvara 
8e Try, Kal OVK aXXy 77 eipr/Tai, ; cp. VI 
502 A C apto-ra /nev elv<u a \eyo/ijii>, el 
yevoLTo, %aXe7rd Se yeveaOai. ov 
fievTOi tidtivard ye. On his part 
however Aristotle also appropriates the 
expression : see the references in ;/. (128) 
on i i, esp. 5io 5e? TroXXd Trpovwore- 
6eladai. KaOdtrep evxop-tvovs, elvai ^evTOi 
fj.y5ev TOVTWV ddvvarov iv(vil). 4 2 n. 
(750). SUSEM. (202) 

\e-ymu 8 cos Set KT\] This is 

1 8 

14 5e?7<rei rots TOLOVTOLS after 15 direpdvTOV T, perhaps rightly || 16 Trapd F p 1 , 
Trepi M lI-Bk. and P 1 (ist hand) || TOVTOIS Welldon || 18 ^kv\ w MT 1 , omit 
ted by Q b I] 19 re omitted by P 1 , re rrjv by M s |] 21 irpwrov fj.ev added before 
el by II 1 and in the margin of P 4 , adopted by Susem. 1 2 : a doubtful case, the words 
would then bear the sense of /md\Lo-ra /xeV. Schmidt inserts them after 
answered by 5e 28) 

14 BapvXwvias] Cp. in. 3. 5 n. (462). 
SUSEM. (200) 

15 direp. r6 TrXrjOos] unlimited in 

e ifs KT\] But how does this cal 
culation agree with that made about 
Sparta in 9 16, 17? Compare nn. 
(306), (311). Even granting that the 
present is the more correct statement, 
how much smaller must we imagine the 
number of citizens to be in Aristotle s 
own ideal state according to the data 
given iv(vn). 4 5 -14? (Schlosser). 
Suppose these data reduce the number 
by one half, one half the same objection 
would still apply to Aristotle. On the 
other hand it is interesting to observe 
how near his penetrating intellect comes 
to a discovery of the fact, that the idle 
ness which belonged as a right to a privi 
leged minority of freeborn landholders 
was really the fundamental evil of the 
Hellenic state. Confined however to the 
circle of opinions current in his own age 
and nation, the philosopher turns back 
when on the very threshold of the truth : 
and follows Plato in adopting this funda 
mental evil as an inalienable primary 
good for his own model state. SUSEM. 

7 17 8l [J.6V OUV...[A-q8V (J16VTOI 

dSwarov] " We should frame our scheme 
on the most favourable supposition, yet 
not so as to be impracticable." Cp. Laws 
V 742 E : rd de /my dvvard our av j3ou\oiro 
[fj.araias [3ov\iri<reis], sc. 6 SiaKOcr^v. 

tnroTi0<r0cu KCIT evxriv] A reference 
to the expression used by Plato Laws iv 
709 D ev^aaBai 5 w euro... /ecu vofj.o6err)s, 
Repub. VII 540 D fj,r) TravrdTrao-iv 

not expressly to be found anywhere in 
the Laws, but Aristotle had a perfect 
right to infer it from IV 704 709 and V 
747 D. SUSEM. (203) 

20 ri 8e KaXcos KT\] But this even 
Plato himself has by no means over 
looked ; see Laws V 737 C oyKos drj TrX??- 
6ovs iKavbs OVK d XXws t>pB&s ylyvoiT dv 
Xex^ets 7) ?rp6s TIJV yrjv /cat rds TUIV TrXTj- 
(rioxupwv 7r6Xets (Schlosser). Aristotle 
brings the same objection against Phaleas, 
7 14 ff. (Eaton). Compare n. (210) on 
6 13. SUSEM. (204) 

Cp. iv(vil). 2. 1 8 r?}s vo/j,odeTiKijs effrtv 
ldeiv, edv rives virdp-^wdL yeiTvwvTes^ Troia 
Trpbs TTOLOVS dcr/c^reW. 

21 el Set KT\] See Jahrb. f. Phil. 
xcm. 1866. p. 329. The sense is clear 
from the parenthesis : if the state is to 
be independent and secure against ag 
gression. Editors who retained the ms. 
iroXiTLKov extorted much the same sense 
out of it, explaining it to mean simply a 
" national " life, the life of a TroXis ; or a 
" social " life, a life of activity, Trpa.KTi.K6v. 
Thus Victorius : a moribus aliarum civi- 
tatum non penitus abhorrere quae fines 
etiam imperii proferre conantur. Shilleto 

II. 6. 9] 

1265 a 14 1265 a 32. 


(Biov TToXe/jiiKov (ov yap jjbbvov dvay/caiov eariv avrrjv rot- (III) 
OVTOIS XprjcrQai, TT^O? rbv 7r6\e/noi> oTrXot? a ^prjaifjia Kara rrjv 

8 oltcetav \wpav eo-riv, d\\d 

25 T? yLt?) TOIOVTOV diTO^e^ 

KOIVOV T?79 TToXeft)?, OyLtO)? 

d7r[e\6]ov(riv. KOI TO 

KOI Trpo? TOU? ef &> TOTTOU?) el &e 
, //^re TO> iSiov fjLijre rov 

rJTTOV &6fc (f)0^pOV<^ elvai TOt? 
t? T^ %WpOLV d\\d KOI 

Be rrjs KTr]<rews opav Set, ^77 vrore 5 
/3e\riov erepco? Siopicrai rco cra^w? fJiaXXov. rocravTrjv <ydp 
30 elvai (frrjcri, Seiv wcrre %fjv o-cocfrpovws, uxrjrep av el rt? elTrev 
9 wore ^z^ ei) (roOro ^yap e crrt /cado\ov yLtaXXo^, 7Ti$r) ecrrt crct)- 
(frpovco? fiev Ta\ai7TGdpa)<$ $e ^v} d\\d ySeXr/a)^ opo? TO 

22 Tro\eiJ.i.Kl)v Muret, Tro\iTu<:6i> Til Ar. Bk. OTrXtrt/cov Montecatino, <.riyejj.oviKov 


KOV P 1 , TroXiTiKov /j.rj [MOV (jor e pov M s , TTO\LTIKOV /j.rj [JLOVOTLKOV P 4 (in the margin) : all 
glosses || 23 oTrXots] opiois Oncken, i/o^t/xotj ? Susem. || 25 </cat> /u?) Schmidt || 
28 aTroOcrti Bender || 30 el is omitted by II 1 . Were this right elTrei/ would have to 
be altered, with Bas. 3 , to etwecey || 31 eireidrj Susem. TL 5 F II Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 2 

wrote " perhaps explained by PI. Protag. 
322 B Tro\iTiK7)v T^xvyv r)s /u.e pos 7To\e/x,t/c?7, 
absolutely political and having therefore 
as one ingredient TroXe^t/c??." The expres 
sion recurs iv(vil). 2 3, 5, 6 (a pro 
bably spurious chapter) and 6 7, where 
see Critical notes. 

23 a XP^FI KT\] Cp. vn (vi). c. 7 
13 (Eaton). SUSEM. (205) 

8 24 el 8e TIS \i.r\ TOIOVTOV KT\] 
" But if any one refuse to approve of a 
life such as this" i.e. warlike "for the 
state at large any more than for the indi 
vidual." Whether war is the end of the 
state is a question debated iv(vn). 14 
13 f., 15 i6. Plato in the Laws 
I 628 C, vii 803, VIII 829 A, holds that it 
*s not. 

28 TO ir\TJ0os really belongs to the 
dependent clause. Whether perhaps it 
might not be better to define otherwise, 
by a clearer definition, the amount of 
property which one man may hold." It is 
characteristic of the writer to require 
analysis and precise definition, TO cra0es, 

and distress. 

9 o-co(}>p6vs here and iv(vn). 5 r, 
and o-coej>poo-vvT] in. 4 16 can only 
mean parsimoniously , parsimony . But 
in II. 5 10 n. (162), 7 12 n. (242), 
I. 13 2f., 6 (112), iv(vn). i 4 (691), 
3 3> ! 5 2 4, 16 8 the meaning is 
temperance or self-restraint in reference 
to eating and drinking and the appetite of 
sex : and it is from this side that the virtue 
is depicted in Nic. Eth. III. cc. 10, 1 1 (1117 
b 23 ff.). There however Aristotle himself 
explains how extravagance leads to pro 
fligacy and to excesses in this direction, 
and that acrwroj, properly a spendthrift, 
comes to mean a profligate ; ib. IV. i 3, 
1119!) 30, 35, 112 1 b 17. In Nic. Eth. iv. 

3 4, 1123!) 5, 4 4, 



<j>T|o-i] Laws 


V 737 D 7775 i*v 6-rr6a"rj TroVcus crcj^poi as 
oWas LKavri T/3e"0eti> TrXeto^os 5 oi55ej> Trpocr- 
5e?. With what follows compare 7 7 n. 
(237 b). SUSEM. (206) 

3 1 KaOoXov naXXov] " For this (term) 
is too vague (cp. / ^d\\ov, 2 2) since 
men may live frugally and at the same 
time wretchedly " : literally, in hardships 

has yet another meaning : viz. modest. 
Lastly, Van der Rest observes that the 
next objection brought against Plato 
affects only a certain inexactitude of ex 
pression and not the thought, which is no 
other than that followed by Aristotle, of 
a right mean between excessive wealth 
and excessive poverty : see esp. Laws v 
741 E : xpTj/xaTtoy/.ds yap OVK Zveariv eV rrj 
ToiavTrj KaracrKevrj : and next note. SUSEM. 
(206 b) 

32 opos] A better definition would be, 
to live frugally and liberally. " Comp. 
iv(vn). 5. i n. eXevOepiws d/ma KO! <rw- 
(pp6v<j}$ ; II. 7. 7 n. TOU ^<rov (TTOXCKTT^OV ; 

VI (IV). II. 4 TUIV eUTl XTJ/iClTWZ/ 17 KTrjfflS 7) 

(j.t<rr) j3e\TiffT7) iravruv" SUSEM. (207) 

252 TIOAITIKHN B. 6. [II. 6. 9 

(ra)(f)p6v(D<; /cal eXeu#e/H6>9 (%&)/)l? yap ^ e/caTepa) TO) {lev TO (III) 
Tpvcfrdv dtco\ov@r}(7ei ) T&3 Se TO eTrtTroVo)?), eirei [Aovai y 
35 el<rlv [efet?] dpeTal Trepl Trjv T?J$ overlap %pfjcriv avTai, oiov 
ovaia Trpdws \JAev~\ r) dvBpelo)? xpfjaOai, OVK e&rtv, o-oxfrpova)? Se 
/cal eXevdeplco? eariv, wore /cal Ta? efets dvayrcalov eivai 
10 7re/3t avTTjV TavTa?. CITOTTOV Be /cal Jig T? KTrjaeis Icrd^ovTa TO 6 

40 VCLl TTjV TKV07TOliaV d6pL(TTOV W9 lKaVO)<S av OfJba 
6i? TO aVTO TT\Tj6o^ Sid T(T? CUTKvi(l<$ OCTtoVOVV 

1265 bf/rv^ x ^ /-/ V \^ -\ n ^ v 

11 OTt oo/cei TOVTO Kai vvv (TV/Apaiveiv Trepi T? 7roA,et?. oet oe 
TOUT 01)^ 6/1010)? dxpi/Boos %iv \rrepl ra? TroXet?] TOT6 /cot z^D^ 
^0^ ^ez^ 7p ouSet? drropel $ia TO fJbepi^eaOai T? ov&ia? el? 


5 pd^vya? jjiriStv e^eiv, edv T6 e\drrov? alert TO irXrjBo? edv Te 

33 Ko.Tepu> Koraes, fxarepov P II Ar. Bk. |j T45] TO II 2 Ar. Bk. || TO] TW II 2 
Ar. I5k. and M s (ist hand) || 34 T$] TO H 2 Ar. Bk. || TO] Tc5 P 2 - 3 Q b Ar. Aid. Bk. 
|| eTTtTroi ws] laboriose viverc William, no doubt an addition of his own : hence tr\v 
Suscm. 1 2 erroneously || 35 [e ^ets] Susern. || aperal] alperal written by an un 
known hand in the margin of the Munich copy of the Aldine, first found in Vettori 
and wrongly defended by Bekker, Madvig, Bernays : omitted by Schneider as a gloss 
upon e ets || XP^l ffu ] ^ LV n 1 . Apparently William translated from the following 
order: avrac at e^ets et crt^ apeTat Trepl rr t v e^iv rrjs ovaias, Ar. from the following: 
auTat at aperaL eldLV e ^ets irepi rrjv xprjcnv rr/s ovvLas \\ 36 /ut-ev is omitted by F II 2 Bk. 
|| 37 eets Susem. 2 , x/o^crets F II Ar. Bk., alpeaeis Madvig: Bernays conjectures irepl 
ras /CT?7<rets avayKalov avras dvai r auras, not happily || elvac after 38 avrrjv H 2 Bk. 
|| 40 d vofj. aX t cr rj & o /A e v rj v Madvig for a^ ofMa\LO d r)0 ofjLei> r]v 

1265 b 2 [wept ras TroXets] Bender who also conjectures TOVTO ok ovx ottv re for de? 
de TOUT oi x || 4 Trepifvyas F M^ s and P 1 (ist hand), and the scribe restored this after 
p 1 had emended it to 

33 x^P^s] if the two be separated. One son and one daughter, then, is the 

34 TO eirurovws (^")- normal family : only when there is child- 

35 apTal...a UTai] These are the only lessness or death does it become neces- 
virtues that have to do with the use of sary that there should be other children 
property. 010^ = 1 mean. in order to marry heirs or heiresses, and 

10 38 Icrd^ovTa] Laws v 740 B to be adopted by the childless (Schlosser). 

74 r A. SUSEM. (207 b) As it stands at present, the polemic does 

" Tis strange that while equalizing their not touch Plato. If Aristotle held the 

properties he should not regulate the num- means proposed by Plato to avoid an 

bers of his citizens." excess of the prescribed number to be 

39 dXX dcf>ivcu KT\] This too is impracticable or impossible to realize he 

very inexactly expressed. All that Plato should have proved his point, as he easily 

in the Laws intends, indeed all that he is might have done. SUSEM. (208) 
able to effect, is to keep the number of 11 1265 b 2 ov\ ojxoitos <XKpi,p(3s = 

citizens unalterably the same : i.e. exactly aKpifBta-repov : "whereas that requires to 

5040 elder men, as many younger men, be fixed with a great deal more nicety in 

with twice that number of women. All the supposed case than at present." Cp. 

beyond that number must, as he expressly 7 18 OVK law n. 
prescribes, go abroad, to found colonies. 4 -irapa^Yas] the cadets ; like irap-f)- 

II. 6. 14] 1265 a 331265 b 18. 253 


{12 7T\LOV 9. jJiaXkoV 06 CLV V7TO\apOL T9 CIV WpLdOai T>?9 OU<T/a9 7 

Tr)v TeKvoTTOLiav, wcrTe dpiOuov TWOS /xr) 7r\elova yevvdv TOVTO 

Se TiOevau TO 7r\fj0o<> d7ro/3\67rovTa 777309 ra9 ruva9, av (p. 35 ) 

crv^ftaivrj Te\evTav Tivas TWV yevvTjOevTwv, Kal 7r^09 TTJV 

13 TWV aXkwv dreKvLav. TO & d(f>e2o-6ai, /caOaTrep ev rat9 

ii aXXat9 TroXea-i, irevia^ dvay/caiov atriov ryve<r0ai rot9 TTO- 

Xtrat9, ^_ 5e Trevia crTaaiv e^Troiel Kal tcafcovprylav. QelBcov 

fj^ev ovv 6 Kopivdios, a)i> vofJioOeTr)^ TWV dp^aLOTaTcov, TOVS 


15 Kal el TO TTpWTov dvl<rov$ efyov TOI)? K\r]povs irdvre^ KaTcl fj,e- 
1476^09 ev Se rot9 vojjbois TOVTOLS TovvavTLOv GCTTIV. d\\d irepl 
fjiev TOVTCOV 7Tc59 dv olo/jLeOa j3e\Tiov e^eiv, \KTeov vaTepov 
e\\e\i7TTai oe rot9 VO/JLOIS TOVTOIS Kal TO, irepl TOV<$ dp^ov- s 

ii dXXais F M s , TrXetVrats P 1 II- AY. Bk. (TT\ over an erasure P :i ) || 12 [$et 5wi ... 
17 i/o-repo^J Schmidt || 14 /cat] /card Bernays || 15 TOL/J K\r]povs before avieovs II 2 
Bk., before eTxoi/ M 8 P 1 || iravTas Bk. 2 || 17 dV after /SeXrtoj/ II 2 Bk. 

opot iTTTrot, supernumeraries outside the 
traces, the elder brother being the yoke- 
horse, fvyios I TTTTOS. 

12 6 Take /maXXov with T?}S curias. 

7 W<TT dpiOfxoO TIVOS] Statistics A\ r ill 
f have to be collected to determine on the 

average how many children die before 
reaching maturity and how many mar 
riages are without issue. " Thus," says 
Schlosser, " the idea of political arithme 
tic is no novelty." Aristotle is a pre- 
curigi^of Malthus (Eaton). CompTalso 
Exc.~n~fb B.TT SUSEM. (209) 

Grote ill. 228 231 : Plato and Aris 
totle saw clearly the law of population, 
but did not recognise the common ele 
ment in the positive and prudential 
checks sufficiently to coordinate them, as 
Malthus did. 

8 These "accidents of life " are before 
Plato, Laws v 740 c E, cp. Grote in. p. 
229 n. (g). Perhaps what Aristotle de 
precates is the laisser faire , afaicrdai, to 
leave it to the citizens at their own dis 

13 10 T& 8 a<f>eur0cu KT\] Aris 
totle (?) repeats this 7 5. SUSEM. (209 b) 

12 r\ 8 irevia KT\] See Laws v 744 
D ; also the account of the transition from 
oligarchy to democracy Rep. vin 555 

D 557 A - 

4>i8&)v 6 Kopv9ios] Nothing is known 
of any such ancient lawgiver of Corinth. 
He is supposed to be different from the 
better known Pheidon of Argos, about 
whom see vm(v). 10. 6. Yet he is called 

a Corinthian by the scholiast on Pindar 
Olyinp. Xlll. 20; TOVTO 5e 07/crtv, eireidri 
<bdowi> TIS avrip KopivOios evpe fj.rpa Kal 
aTadfjua. This is one of the serious diffi 
culties in this chapter mentioned Introd. 
p. 33 n, 4, 14 (4). There is always the 
heroic remedy ; see Critical Notes and 
M. Schmidt in Jalirb. /. PhiL cxxv. 
1882. p. 822. 

1 6 4v 8e TOIS vop.ois KT\] A decided 
ly unfounded assertion, as was explained 
in the note on 10. Aristotle (?) repeats 
this objection against Phaleas, 7 5 : 
comp. n. (204) on 7. SUSEM. (210) 

14 17 TJcrrepovj IV (vil). 10 11 f. 
and esp. 16 15 f. n. (946). From the 
latter passage it is seen of what means 
he is thinking. To prevent any increase 
in the fixed number of the citizens Aris 
totle sanctions the procuring of abortion. 
Cp. Introd. p. 56 and n. (192) on 5. 
SUSEM. (211) 

18 eXXe XcurTcu KT\] Laws v 734 E: 
the warp is necessarily stronger and firmer 
than the woof, odev 8r] TOVS /j,eyd\as dpxas v 
TCUS TroXecnv ap^ovTas dec 5ia.Kpive(r8ai TWO. 
TpOTrov TavTrj /cat TOVS (Tytu/c/xxs TraiSetq. 
fiaaaviadcvTas e/cdcrrore /card \oyov. As 
a matter of fact this objection of Aris 
totle s is altogether unfair. In the Laws 
Plato has done exactly that which Aris 
totle here requires : he has prescribed 
for all the citizens of his model state 
the same course of training, on the 
ground of which he expects them to dis 
cover for themselves which among them 



[II. 6. 14 


ecrovTai Siacfrepovres ra>v 
20 Sew, cocrTrep et; erepov TO crrrjiJLOViov eplov ^iverat, TT}? 
i 15 ovrco /cal TOI)? ap^ovras e^euv Selv TT^O? roi>9 
&e rrjv Trdcrav ovcriav e(j)i7j(7i, <yive<J0ai 
TrXacr/a?, Sta ri TOVT ov/c av eiij eVl rrjs 7779 
/cal TTJV rcov oiKojreSwv e Siaipeaiv Sel crKOTreiv, 
25 (7VfjL(f>ep6i, 7rpo9 ol/covofJLiav Svo <ydp 

<ydp (III) 



TTOT ov 

19 OTTWS II- Bk. || 20 eip\ 5?7 Koraes ; Conring would omit Se??/ here or in 21. 
Bergk, while defending de?i>, suggested <ov>dev <a\Xo r)> Fiinf. Abhand, p. 65 
n. 2 (Leipz. 1883) || 21 5eZ II 1 || [e7ret...26 ot/ceri/] Schmidt, perhaps rightly, cp. 
nn. (213) (214) (215) || 25 (rv/m<ptpet M s P 1 L s Aid. and P 2 3 (ist hand), 
rP 4 Q b T b U b Bk. and P 2 (corr. 1 ) and a later hand in P 3 

are better fitted for the warp and which 
for the woof, and to vote accordingly at 
the election of magistrates. What other 
means has Aristotle at his command for 
his own ideal state? Besides it must not 
be forgotten that by the institution of the 
Nocturnal Assembly (as explained in 
n. 193 on 5) Plato aimed at making 
especial provision for a staff (personnel) 
more highly qualified to administer the 
government and to hold offices of state. 
The assertion then that this simile is all 
that we learn from him as to the character 
of those qualified for the government is a 
mistake due to a too hasty perusal of the 
dialogue in question. There might cer 
tainly have been good reason for a doubt 
whether the institution was practicable; 
but here no such doubt is expressed. 
SUSEM. (212) 

It is the professed object of the Epi- 
nomis to expound the course of study for 
the Nocturnal Assembly which is to aim 
at controlling the election of magistrates. 
But nothing can be inferred from Aris 
totle s silence respecting it : Zeller Plato 
p. 616 n. (59) Eng. tr. 

20 CTTT][l6viOV...KpOKT|s] Zeller Pld- 

tonic Studies p. 107 took these terms in 
the Laws to refer to the appointment of 
magistracies and of the laws for them. But 
in PI. Politictis 283 B, 309 B, the brave 
and energetic natures are the warp and 
the gentler and weaker natures the woof. 

21 8eiv] Taking up the preceding 
Setv of line 20. 

15 It would certainly relieve the 
chapter to reject this section, as M. 
Schmidt proposes. 

22 p-exP 1 TfVTcurXao-Cas] Here and 
7 4 Aristotle (?) has mistaken Plato s 
meaning, as if he had permitted the accumu 
lation of moveable property to the amount 

of four times the value of the real estate 
belonging to the family. As a matter of 
fact in Laws v 744 E (cf. vi 775 E ff.) he 
only allows the increase of the total pro 
perty to this fourfold value ; consequently 
only the acquisition of three times as 
much personal property. The recurrence 
of the mistake at least favours the as 
sumption that both passages are by the 
same author. SUSEM. (213) 

23 810, TI TOVT OVK civ ei t] eirl TTJS YTJS 
KT\] This objection is simply incompre- 
hensible. There is not the least provi 
sion for an increase of landed property in 
Aristotle s own ideal state: see iv (vn). 
10 9 ff. SUSEM. (214) 

25 Svo yO P olKOTTtSa] One home 
stead near the city and the centre of the 
territory and one placed on its borders, 
the latter to be occupied and managed by 
the married son and heir to the farm: 
Laws v 745 E, vi 775 E ff., cp. vui 848. 
Aristotle (?) here blames this arrangement, 
but in his own pattern state he has adop 
ted something very similar iv (vii). 10 
ii. We might assume that when he 
wrote Bk. iv (vii). he had changed his 
mind and then forgotten to expunge from 
his criticism of Plato the passage before 
us as no longer in point. Here how 
ever M. Schmidt s suggestion of interpo 
lation is quite as obvious, although it may 
be met by an inquiry whether a later 
editor would not have carefully avoided 
introducing this inconsistency. SUSEM. 

But is the inconsistency proved ? " Plato 
would assign to each man two ot /c??<ms 
Laivs 745 E, or, as Aristotle puts it, oi/co- 
TreSa, oi /ctas: Aristotle recommends two 
K\rjpoi, not two oiK7)<ris or regular esta 
blishments" (Jackson). To this I reply 
that Plato too repeatedly uses the expres- 

II. 6. 17] 

16 Sie\(iov 

1265 b 19 1265 b 33. 




k, %a\67ro^ Se oliclas Svo 

fji,ev elvai ^r]re 
yu,ecr?7 Be TOVTWV, TJV rcaXovcri 7ro\iTeiav IK <ycip TWV OTT\L~ 
Tevovrwv eo-riv. el /uev ovv 0^9 K0t,vordr7)v ravrrjv Karaa/cevd- 
30 et rat? TroiXecn rcov d\\wv TroKireiwv, /caXco? e tp^icev tVco? 
el S to? apicrTrjV yaera Ti]V TrpWTrjv TroXireiav, ov KO\W^. 
Tayj& yap rrjv TWV A^CLKMVWV Tt? av eTraiveaeie yu-aXXo^, 7} KCLV 
17 a\~kriv Tivd dpiaTOKpaTLKcorepap. GVLOL fjiev ovv \e<yovcriv aJ? Set 10 

27 /SouXercu after fj.kv M s P 1 || 29 [et ^^...1266 a 6 8-rjfj.oKpaTtKd] Schmidt, pro 
bably rightly, cp. . (223) || 30 iroKirdav H :J Bk. and l )2 - y , (ist hand) yp. TTO\L- 
retcov P- (corr. 1 in the margin), in P 3 TroAtretwj was written over it by a later hand, 
but again erased [| 32 ris after av IP Bk. 



sion K\-fjpoi. Even supposing that, in con 
tradistinction to him, Aristotle really in 
tended to provide only one of the two 
estates with a dwelling-house, how c:m 
he have believed that to farm two estates 
in separate localities would thus be made 
easier than if they had dwellings upon 
them ? Is it not clear that the opposite 
will hold good? Nay more, what idea 
are we to form of two such detached pro 
perties, one near the town and one in the 
country, unless there are farm -buildings 
and a house upon the latter? If this be 
so, the above supposition is a priori im 
possible. Even Plato does not arrange 
that the country house shall be a regular 
establishment in the sense of being always 
inhabited, but the son who inherits suc 
ceeds to it as soon as he is grown up and 
married, and so sets up the second esta 
blishment there (Laws vi 775 E f. ). In 
Aristotle s best state such an appropria 
tion of the second dwelling-house is cer 
tainly excluded, because there, when the 
heir marries, he succeeds his superan 
nuated father as citizen and consequently 
as proprietor of both the family proper 
ties (see note and Excursus on iv[vn]. 
16 10, 1335 a 32 35): but that is the 
sole point in which Aristotle diverges 
from Plato in this matter. To what pur 
pose he would destine this second house 
can only be conjectured : it may be to 
lodge the superannuated father, perhaps 
with the lands belonging to it as a sort of 
retiring pension. In any case the incon 
sistency, as Aristotle s text has come 
down to us, is unquestionable. SUSEM. 

26 8iX(iv x w P^S = distinct, separate 

16 O-V>VTO|I,S] The entire arrange 
ment of the constitution tends neither to 

oligarchy nor to democracy but to some 
thing intermediate known as Polity. Plato s 
citizens are the heavy-armed men : Laws 
VI 753 15, TrdvTes [Aev KOLVUVQVVTUV rfjs T&V 
d/r^ojTWf aipecreus, orroffocirep av oVXa iir- 

TTIKO, TJ Tre^KO. TttfuJI TCU Kdl TTO\t/Jl,OV KKOi- 

This is the criterion of a 

Polity . 

28 TToXireiav] Compare in. 7 4 
with the notes and references there given. 
SUSEM. (216) 

29 ws KOIVOTCITT]V KrX] "as the most 
universally adapted for cities at large" 
vi (iv). c. ii with n. (1282) on i. 
SUSEM. (217) 

31 irpwTT]V = highest, normal. So 6 
irp&ros a-vXXoyLcrfj.os. Comp. I. 2. 5. 

32 Plato s arrangement Rep. B. viu 
implies this. 

33 cipurTOKpaTiKampav] i.e. a con 
stitution which, like the Spartan, has the 
character of an Aristocracy to a greater 
extent than Polity. The term may be 
thus explained : true Aristocracy coin 
cides with Aristotle s best constitution ; 
but in a transferred and secondary sense 
this name is earned by such constitu 
tions as combine aristocratical with oli 
garchical and democratical elements, like 
Carthage, or only with democratical ele 
ments, like Sparta; this is stated vi(iv). 
7 24, cp. vi(iv). 9 6 ff., 2 i n. 
(1133), 4 n. (1141), 10 i, ii 2. 
Further consult Excursus I. on Bk. in 
and the notes to in. 5 10 (521), 13 9 
(595), n (597), i3(6oi), 24 (614); 14 
i5 (633), 17 3 (677), 5 (678): vi(iv). 
2 2 (1136 7). Of course such mixed 
constitutional forms are nearer to the true 
Aristocracy than is Polity, which is a 
blending of Oligarchy and Democracy : 
vi(iv). cc. 8, 9. See on this the notes to 



[II. 6. 17 

Trjv dpi<TTr)v TroXiTeiav e f aTrao-oov elvat, TCOV TroKijeiwv i^e^i- (HI) 
35 ty/j,ev7jv, Sib KOI rrjv TCOV Aa/ceSaifjiovlcov iiraivovviv (elvai 
jap avrrjv oi fj.ev ef 6\i>yapxias /cal {jiovap%las Kal 8?;//,o- 
Kparias fyacriv, \e<yovTe$ rrjv jjiev $a(Ji\dav /^ovap-^lav, rrjv 
Se TWV yep6i>TG)v dp%rjv o\i<yap%lav t ^jJiOKparelaOai Se 
Kara TYJV TCOV e(f)6pa)v dp^rjv Sid TO e/c TOV STJ/AOV elvai TOI)? 
40 e<p6povs o l Se TTfv fjiev e^opelav eivca TvpavviSa^ Srj/^o/cpa- (p- s6> 
3e Kara re rd crvGGiTia /cal TOV aX\ov ftiov TOV 
ev Se rot? vb^ois eipr^Tai TOVTOIS 00$ oeov awy- 11 

34 7ro\LTeiuv] TroXtrojv r T b I! 35 rV omitted by F M s || TUV omitted by P 1 
|| 39 TWV omitted by APP 1 , \TUV~] Susem. 1 2 || 40 etpopiav II 3 and P 3 (ist hand, 
emended by a later hand) 

ni. 7 4 (536, 538); vi(iv). 2 4 (1141), 
7 4 (1237). SUSEM. (218) 

17 33 vioi nv ovv KT\] Cp. 
IV(VTI). 14 16 n. (911), vi(iv). i 6 n. 
(1123). Thus we learn that two schools 
of political theorists, to one of which 
Ephoros perhaps belonged 1 , dissented 
from the writer s opinion and agreed in 
regarding monarchy, oligarchy, and de 
mocracy as elements of the Spartan con 
stitution; while the second school (40 oi 
5e) added tyranny as a fourth element. 
It is strange that in this passage Ari 
stotle (?) takes up no definite position in 
relation to the two views and does not 
oppose to them his own. Presumably 
he judged it sufficient, in order not to 
enter on a longer digression, to have 
denominated this constitution a mixed 
aristocracy. From the explanations which 
he has devoted specially to it we learn 
that he looked upon the council of Elders 
as the aristocratical, the Ephors as the 
democratic element in it, 9 19 28, 
but at the same time also as in a cer 
tain sense related to rvpavvis : see on 9 
20. He finds another democratic ele 
ment, though such in intention only, 
in the common messes, 9 32. He 
regards the Spartan kingship as far too 
limited to give the constitution any par 
ticular colouring : in. 14 3, 4; 15 i, 
2; 1 6 i. It is still more strange then 
that Aristotle (?) only mentions here the 
views of those other theorists on this sub 
ject, passing over in total silence that ex 
pressed by Plato himself in the Laws iv 
712 c ff. (cp. in 692 A f., 693 E), a view 
which stands much nearer to his own, 
representing the Spartan constitution as 

1 See on this Introd, p. 35 n. 3 and Susemihl s 
critical edition p. LXII. 

mainly a mixture of^ aristocracy and de 
mocracy, but with the addition of the 
royal office and an element akin in one 
view to rvpavisis, in another to democracy, 
viz. the Ephors. Plato himself tells us, 
Laivs xn 962 E, that he was not the first 
to pronounce a mixed constitution the 
most excellent in practice : oi 5e cro0c6- 
rarot, ws otovrai, irpos ravrd re (liberty 
and dominion over others) /ecu ra roiavra 
u fj-Travra [/SXeTro^res vo/AodeTovvTai], els 
ev 5e ovdev t a (pepovrus rertyU 77/^.6- 
v ov fyovTes <ppd ^Lv, eis 5 raXXa O.VTOLS 5ft 
p\e-jrii>; presumably his predecessors 
were to some extent the same who are 
here noticed. Compare further Excur 
sus i to Bk. in. SUSEM. (219) 

Isocrates Lacedaemonios /m.d\i<rra dtj/^o- 
KpaTov/uievovs Tvyx^avew dicit Arcopag. 61 

18 1266 a i ev 8c rots vojxous KT\] 
Laii s III 693 D f. eiffl iro\t,TL(j}v olov jj.i]- 
repes dvo Tiv4s..,KO,l TT]V ju.ei Trpocrayopeveiv 
/uLovapxiav 6p96v, rr\v 5 av drj/j-OKpariav : 
Persia is the extreme case of the one, 
Athens of the other : 5e? 5rj odv Kal avay- 
KOUOV //,eraXa/3e?j a^otV TOVTOLV : 701 E; 
VI 756 E {ACffov fry ^x L (J*ovQ.pXf- K fy Ka -l 
5r]iAOKpaTi.Kr)S TroXtre/as rjs del del /jLeo eveiv 
rriv TroXtretW : cp. iv 7 1 2 u f. However 
what Plato really says in these passages is 
somewhat different, viz. that a good con 
stitution must hold the mean between 
democracy and monarchy. Moreover he 
expressly guards against being supposed 
to derive anything in his mixed form of 
the state from TV paw is, IV 712 c: riva 
dr) Trore TroXtret ai fyopiev ev i> rfj TroXei 
TrpoaraTTeLV ^...olov drj/AOKpaTiav rivd r) 
oXiyapxiav ^ dpiaTOKpariav T) (3aai\iKriv. 
ov yap 5ri rvpavvlda ye TTOV \eyois dv : and 
in the Republic he has already himself 

II. 6. 18] 

1265 b 34 1266 a 4. 


rrjv apio-rrjv r jrd\ireiav K STJ^OK parlay KOI rvpavvl- (III) 
So?, a? rj TO irapaTTdV OVK av T? delrj TroXireta? 77 ^etp/crra? 
4 Tracrwv. /3e\ri>ov ovv \e<yovcriv ol TrXe/ou? fiiyvvvre^ 77 ^P ^ 

1266 a 3 x/ot <rrous P 2 and P 3 (ist hand, emended by a later hand) || Trdtriv F || 
4 [17... 5 /SeXrt wi ] Riese, see Comm. 

pronounced democracy and rvpavvis to be 
the two worst governments, the latter as 
the extreme of despotic rule, the former 
as the extreme of liberty. Aristotle how 
ever everywhere else calls Oligarchy and 
rvpavvis the two worst forms of govern 
ment, see on vi(iv). n 21 n. (1305) : so 
that here he contradicts himself. Accord 
ing to the statement in the Laws it is no 
doubt true that every unlimited, i.e. pure 
and unmixed, monarchy coincides with 
rvpavvis: III 691 D 701 E, IV 710 E, 
712 C ff . : kingship or limited monarchy 
and limited democracy are intermediate 
or mixed forms. Hence it would cer 
tainly be no incorrect expression of 
Plato s thought in the Laws, that the 
right constitution should hold a mean 
between democracy and rvpavvL s. But 
from this it does not in the least follow 
that it must be compounded of the two: 
for it would also be a mean between 
them if it were compounded of forms 
which approximate partly to the one 
partly to the other, in order thus to blend 
freedom with order or authority. In 
the passages in question Plato is speak 
ing of monarchy and democracy as prin 
ciples of all government, not of certain 
constitutions, since he finds the prin 
ciple of authority more clearly stamped 
on the one, that of liberty on the other 
(Henkel). Consequently, to make the 
state in the Laws a combination of 
oligarchical with democratical elements 
is not inconsistent with his require 
ment. Besides, it is also incorrect to call 
these the only constituents of the mixed 
form and so to make the constitution 
simply a Polity (iroXiTda) : for it de 
serves to be called a mixed aristocracy 
with far greater right than the Spartan 
constitution: see on 5 (193), 14 (212), 
21 (229); Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 624 
631, Translation of the Laws p. 980; 
also Zeller Plato p. 535 f. Eng. tr. Nor 
is this state of the Laws without a cer 
tain monarchical head ; for in so far as it 
too is preeminently an educating institu 
tion, such a post is filled by the highest 
official who presides over education. 
However Henkel (Studien 65) is quite 
right in inferring from all the foregoing 


that the monarchical element of the state 
is rather to be looked for in the magis 
trates collectively, in virtue of the ex 
tended powers assigned to them. But 
this by no means excludes the substantial 
correctness of Oncken s remark (pp. c. I. 
209): "taken literally monarchy and 
democracy are incapable of reconcilia 
tion : for where one rules, all cannot rule, 
and conversely. But if a reconciliation 
or blending of the two is thought of as 
possible at all, it can only be understood 
in this way, that the numbers are set 
aside as unessential and the mode of 
government emphasized as the essential 
feature. In that case, however, the no 
menclature is quite suitable to the case 
before us." The highest magistracy, 
apart from the council, in Plato s state of 
the Laws, the 36, or (including the officer 
who presides over education) the 37 VO/JLO- 
(fivXaKes, have an approximately monarchi 
cal authority in consequence of the large 
powers entrusted to them * ; in the sense 
in which Aristotle himself (?) admits that 
the double kingship of the Spartans is 
called monarchy, 17, and the board of 
ephors a rvpavvis, though there were five 
of them : and further, designates the 
people in the most extreme democracy as 
a many-headed monarch. Taken literally, 
the union of oligarchy and democracy, as 
Aristotle finds it in the TroAireta, is just 
as impossible as that of monarchy and 
democracy. SUSEM. (220) 

4 P\TIOV ovv KT\] That is, in the 
particular case here given (cp. n. 223) 
they are more in the right : they either 
leave out tyranny, the worst form of 
government, altogether and combine other 
elements with democracy ; or at any rate 
add two other elements, oligarchy and 
monarchy, one of which at least, viz. 
monarchy, is distinctly better. The two 
schools of political theorists and eulogists 
of the Lacedaemonian constitution noticed 
in 17, are doubtless intended. If it 
were true (1266 a i, 2) that the best 
polity according to Plato is one com- 

* Only Oncken s assertion, that Plato intended 
the council to be irresponsible, is a decided 
mistake, and all the inferences which he has 
attached to the assertion fall to the ground. 



[II. 6. 18 
%ovo-a (III) 


5 irXeiovutv crvy/ceifjievr} irdXiTela /9eXrtW]. eirevra ov 
fyaiveTai fiovap^LKov ovoev, d\}C oXiyap^iKa Kal 

19 rj\ov Se eK r??9 TWV dp^ovTav /caracrrao-eei)?* TO 
e aipeToov K\7]pwTOV<; K.OIVOV dfAcfroiv, TO Se rot? 

10 repot? eirdvayKes eK/c^rjcrid^ew elvai Kal 

rj TL Troielv d\\o TMV TTO\I,TI,K<V, roi)? 8 d^elaOaL, TOVTO 8 
6v, Kal TO TreipdaOat, TrActou? etc TWV evTropwv elvai 

to both " i.e. the lot to democracy, the 
voting to oligarchy [or aristocracy]. This 
took place in the election of the council, 
of the magistrates charged with the police 
of the city (dyopav6/j.oi and dcrru^o/xoi), 
and of the superintendents of the games 
(dywvias d#Ao$ercu): Laivs VI 756 B E, 

763 D f., 765 B D. SUSEM. (223) 

See R. Dareste Le systeme electoral dc s 
Lois de Plat on in Anmiaire de V association 
pour Tenc.des etudes grecques. xvn. 1883. 
PP- 6574. 

9 TO" 8e TOIS |iev KT\] Laws vi 

764 A : trd) S et s eKKX^criav Kal TOV KOLVOV 
u\\oyov 6 (3ov\6/ut,vos, eirdvayKes 5 ^<rro> 
ry T&V devTepuv Kal irp&Tuv rt / u7? y udrwi , 

^Td^7]Tai TO IS %v\\oyoi.s, Tpirijj d TL/J.-/I- 
fj.a.TL Kal rerapry /ULTJ CTrdvayKes, a\\a 
d^TjyUios dfaiaOw. SUSEM. (224) 

10 4>epiv is suffragiu//! t ferr$* to vote: 
with ace., to vote for certain candidates 
for office. 

Kal <f>t piv apxovTas] As a matter 
of fact this regulation only applies to the 
election of the superintendents of the 
games (dyuvias d#\o0<:Tcu) Laws vi 765 C, 
and of the council vi 756 B E: but 
Aristotle does not come to speak of this 
latter election until 20. SUSEM. (225) 

1 1 TOVS 8 cu|>ur0ai] Not however at 
the election of qyopavo/uLoi and dcrTwofj-oi, 
Laws 764 A : %etpoToz>eirco 5 Tras TrdWa* 
6 5 ur) 6\wv, eoiv el<rayye\0rj Trpos roi)s 
apxovTas, fr)fjuoi!>ff6<ji). SUSEM. (226) 

TOVTO 8 ] This 5<r is resumptive of 5 
in line 9. Cp. TOVTO d /xt/xemu, 2 6. 

1 2 Kal T6 impdo-Bau irXefovs KT\] 
Of these two statements the latter, viz. 
that the highest officers of state are to be 
elected from the highest classes of the 
census, is quite incorrect. Even for the 
Guardians of the Laws (vouofivXaKes) no 
such regulation is found : Laws vi 753 B, 
766 A f. : nor for the supreme board of 
control (evOvvoi) xii 945 E ff.: nor again 
for the military officers (crTpaTrjyol, iinrap- 
XOL, fivXapxoi, Ta^iapxoL) 755 B ff. And as 

pounded of democracy and tyranny, then 
the general statement in a 4 might justly 
be made : for any three, or more, forms 
would make a better mixture than these 
two. SUSEM. (221) 

T[ -yap IK irXeiovcov KT\] This state 
ment made thus universally is not in 
keeping with the philosopher s thought. 
He does not blame Plato for not com 
bining elements enough, but because he 
would construct a polity out of the two 
corrupt elements 1 (Riese). On Aristotle s 
own principles a mixture of aristocracy 
and democracy, or even of oligarchy and 
democracy, must be better than one of 
oligarchy, democracy, and rvpavvis. As 
was shown in the last note, the preceding 
sentence, rightly understood, is a simple 
deduction from what has been laid down 
above, and needs no additional reason, 
least of all one which erroneously ex 
tends it beyond the limits of this right 
interpretation and lays it down as uni 
versally true. The chapter contains diffi 
culties enough, but this is beyond the 
limits of all that we dare attribute to 
Aristotle himself: surely this illogical 
generalization is interpolated. We shall 
however be obliged to go some way fur 
ther than this, I think. For even one 
who, like myself, either rejects or mis 
trusts Schmidt s other atheteses in this 
chapter will nevertheless be unable to 
deny that the entire passages 16 18, 
12651^ 29 el [j.v . . . 1 266 a 6 Sy/moKpaTiKa, 
and 22, 1266 a 22 ws...25 ovcei/ ts, do 
most violently interrupt the connexion 
and leave the impression that they are 
non - Aristotelian. This suspicion is 
strengthened by the strange statements 
noticed in nn. (219, 220). SUSEM. (222) 

5 ^(.ovcra sc> V & T0 ^ robots TroXtret a 
HovapxiK^v ov8tv. See n. (220). 

7 eYK\veiv = to betray a tendency 
towards, as in vni(v). 7. 7- 

19 8 r6 jxfcv -yAp cuperwv K\T|- 
ptoToiis] "For selection by lot from a 
body elected previously by vote belongs 

II. 6. 20] 

1266 a 5 1266 a 14. 


13 rot)? ap^ovras, KOI ra? per/ fora? /c TWV 
20 rwv. o^yapxiKrjv Be TTOLGL Kal rrjv TT$? (3ov\fj$ a ipea-w. 

I- (III) 

alpovv- 12 

regards the former statement, instead of 
arrangements to secure the election of a 
majority of the officials from the richest 
citizens, the truth is that only in the case 
of a minority^ namely the aaTvv6[j.oi, is 
it provided that they shall be of the 
highest class on the register, while the 
superintendents of the games (adXod^rai) 
must be elected from the third or the 
second class. SUSEM. (227) 

13 rets p.-y<rras sc. dpxcis. T/OTMO. is_ a 
property qualification, census. See Laws 
744 u E. 

20 14 -rqv TTJS POV\T]S al p<riv] 
Thus described in Laws 756 B E : The 
council shall consist of 360 members. If 
we divide the whole number into four 
parts of ninety each, we get ninety coun 
cillors for each class. First all citizens 
shall vote for members of the council 
taken from the first class ; they shall be 
compelled to vote, and, if they do not, 
shall be duly fined (irp&Tov /mev e/c TWV 

, 17 frifJ.iova da.i rbv fj.rj 
rrj 5od<jT7 fr/mla). When the candidates 
have been elected some one shall mark 
them down ; this shall be the business of 
the first day. And on the following day 
the election shall be made from the second 
class in the same manner as on the pre 
vious day (777 8 va-repaLa <f)pei.v e/c r&v Sev- 
rfywv Ti/JL-ri/j.aTwv Kara. ravTci Kadairep rrj 
irpo&dev) ; and on the third day an election 
shall be made from the third class, at 
which every one may if he likes vote and 
the three first classes shall be compelled 
to vote (T/HTT? 5 IK TWV Tpirwv Tt/xTj/uarwv 
(ptpeiv fj.v rov [3ov\6/ji.ei>ov, lirdva/yKes 8e 
elvai TOIS TCOV rpiaiv TijjLT^fiaTwv) ; but 
the fourth and lowest class shall be under 
no compulsion, and any member of this 
class who does not vote shall not be 
punished. On the fourth day members 
of the council shall be elected from the 
fourth and lowest class (reraprri 5e 0^- 

plV fJL^V K TOV TTdLpTOV Kal ff/J-lKpOTa- 

TOV TifjL-f)/j,a.Tos airavras) ; they shall be 
elected by all, but he who is of the fourth 
class shall suffer no penalty, nor he who 
is of the third, if he be not willing to 
vote ; but he who is of the first or second 
class, if he does not vote shall be pun 
ished; he who is of the second class 
shall pay a fine triple the fine which was 
exacted at first, and he who is of the 
first class quadruple. The number of 
candidates thus nominated is reduced 

first, by election, to 180 of each class 
and next, by sortition, to 90 from each 
class. The passage continues : On the 
fifth day the rulers shall bring out the 
names noted down, in the presence of all 
the citizens, and every man shall choose 
out of them under pain, if he do not, of 
suffering the first penalty ; and when they 
have chosen 180 out of each of the classes, 
they shall choose one half of them by 
lot, who shall undergo a scrutiny : these 
are to form the council for the year (Dr 
Jowett s translation). 

Plato s object is to give the numerically 
smaller and wealthier first and second 
classes not only their half of the senators, 
but also a preponderant influence in the 
return of the other half, which they will 
secure provided there are abstentions 
enough among the poorer citizens. It is 
obvious that Aristotle is referring to the 
proceedings of the first four days. What 
is the number returned from each class ? 
(a) Grote thinks 360, Plato ill. 363 n. g. 
(/3) Stallbaum, J. G. Schneider follow 
older editors in assuming it to be ninety, 
but omit to explain what takes place on 
the fifth day. (7) Mr Cope supposed that 
on each successive day each class voted for 
90 candidates belonging to a given class, 
so that the abstentions of classes ill and 
IV might, in the extreme case, reduce 
the roll of candidates published on the 
fifth day from 1440 to u/o (360 + 360 + 
270+ 1 80). Perhaps none of these sug 
gestions is correct ; the proceedings of 
the first four days are in reality a nomi 
nation of candidates, not an election : 
there is no limitation to the number of 
candidates nominated, each citizen pre 
sumably recording a vote, i. e. sending in 
one name. The votes recorded are tal<en 
down and published on the fifth day (eTret- 
dav 5 evexd&ffi, TOIJTOVS ^v KaTaa"rj/j.riva(r- 
#cu...7r^u,7TT?7 5 T]/m.tpa ra Ka.TO.a"r)[J.a.i>dvTa. 
OTO/xara e^evey KCLV /mtv rovs apxovras ideiv 
Traai rots TroAt rcus). The voting on the 
fifth day is confined to these duly nomi 
nated candidates, and as 180 must be 
then selected from each class (e/cX^ayras) 
Plato appears to assume that more than 
that number will be nominated on each 
of the first four days. 

cupouvrai |iev KT\] For all are bound 
to elect from the first class, and then 
again equally [i.e. in like manner] from 
the second : and next from the third, save 
that it is not compulsory on all (to vote), 


260 nOAITIKHN B. 6. [II. 6. 20 

15 rai jJiev yap Trdvres ef dvdy/crjs [aXX J etc rov irpcorov TL^- (III) 
/jiaros, elra 7rd\iv tcrct)? e/c rov Sevrepov, elr etc T&V rplrcov, 
7r\rjv ov Trdaiv eTrdvay/ces, <XX > 77 TO? [e/c] TU>V rpiwv [97] Ti/jurj- 
/jbdrcov, K Se rov rerdprov [raJvTGTdpT&v] JJ.OVOLS 7rdvayK<$ rot? 

21 irpociTOiS teal rot? Sevrepois etr ere rovrayv. io~ov d(j) e/cdarov TIJIIJ- 
10 /u-aro? aTroSel^al $it}<Ti $eiv dpiO^ov. ecrovTai Sr) TrXetW? ol 

etc TWV fj-eyicrTwv TL/^TjfjLdrwv KCU /SeXr/ov? 8id TO eviovs pr) 

22 alpelaOai TWV STJ/JLOTLKCOV 8ta TO /AT) enrdvayice^. w<$ pen ovv is 
OUK e /c ^TI/JLOK parlay real jjiovap^ia^ Set o-vvea-rdvai rr)v roiav- 
Tr)V TToXirelav, IK TOVTCOV cfravepov KOI TWV vcrrepov 

25 z/o)^ ora^ 7ri/3d\\y Trepl rrj<f roiavr^ TroXtreta? 77 

15 e dm7/c7?s, from Plat. Laws VI. 765 B ff. Schmidt (and probably Ar.), &rd- 
vaynes F II Bk., [e7rdi>a7Kes] Schlosser Susem. 1 || [d\X ] Madvig, d\X trans 
posed to 17 before TJ Susem. 1 ; dXXd <7rpc5rov> Lambin, irpwrov Bender, r as Muret 
before him changed dXX into (J ( = 90) || 16 tVcos Nickes (Plato has Kara TO.VTO.), 
foovs F II Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 || rov rpirov Oncken || 17 [TT\T]V] Madvig || OVK 
[Tracni ] Bender || <dXX > 17 Susem., rjv TH. Ar. Bk. Bender, TrXV Gottling in his 
edition and Madvig, 77 Gottling in Jenaer Lectionskat. 1855, elra <5 > e/c rwv rpi- 
rwv ov iraviv e-rrdvayKes <7rX?jJ dXX > 97 TCHS [er] TUV rpiCov [y] Ti/u.-rj/maTUV, K re KT\ 
? Susem. Of course dXX rj or TrX^v would do just as well as irX^v dXX 77 || elr 
K TUV rpLrwv. ir\rji> < dXX > ov iraXiv eTravayites rjv rCiv rerapruv ro?s e/c TOV rpLrwv 
<(f>epeiv fj.r] /3ouXo/x,^ots> e/c 5 /crX Schmidt || elr e/c rcDv rpirwv ov ircicn.v eirdvayKes 
TrXrjv ro?s e/c rwi Tpi&v elr e/c TWJ rerapruv /xovois Welldon |] [e/c] Susem. 
(Plato omits it) || rpiuiv ri/jL-rj/Jidrwi Gottling Jcnacr Lcctionskat. tit sitp., from 
Plato; rplrwv T) rerdpruv T H Ar. Bk., rpiwv \j] rerdprwv] Gottling in his edition, 
Madvig; Engelhardt Spengel- Bender and Jowett omit rpiruv rj \\ 18 [ru>v re- 
rdpruv] Engelhardt Bender Susem. ; but [roO reraprov\ with Sylburg is perhaps as 
good : rwv rerrdpwv Camot Sepulveda s mss. Vettori 2 (and a marginal note from his 
own hand in the copy of his ist edition in the Munich Library), rlav ri^/mdnov 
Gottling in the Jenaer Lections kat. I.e. || eTrdvayxes <rii Schmidt || 20 5 II 1 
(emended by p 1 ) || [22 ws...25 CTK^LS] Schmidt, probably rightly, cp. n. (223) || 
23 ou/c omitted by II 1 (supplied by p 1 ) || yu.oi apxfas] oXiyapxias Heinsius Schmidt 
I! <oi e<r#cu> dec Schmidt || (rvveardvcu II 1 P 3 (ist hand) P 2 (corr. 1 ), ffvviardvai II 3 
Bk. and P 2 (ist hand altered by corr. 1 ) and P 3 (corr. 1 ), perhaps rightly || 24 
</ccu> e/c rovruv Schmidt 

but only on those of the three (higher) belong to the highest classes and who are 

classes, and (in electing candidates) from superior men will be a majority (of the 

the fourth (class) it is compulsory only voters); because through the absence of 

on the first and second. compulsion some citizens of the popular 

21 19 etr K TOVTCOV KT\] More ac- party will abstain from the election. 
curately stated, there is first an election of 21 P\TO\>S] I.e. men who take a 

1 80 candidates belonging to each class out higher interest in political life. So far, 

of the larger number first returned, and in then, even this oligarchical regulation 

a similar manner : secondly, a selection of contains an aristocratic element. SUSEM. 

one half of these, 90 from each class, by (229) 

lot, to make up the whole number of 360. 22 24 TWV vcrTpov...<rKc x|/is] vi(iv). 

Vide supra. SUSEM. (228) c. 7 and esp. cc. 8, 9, n. SUSEM. (230 

20 ^o-ovrat 8r] KT\] Thus those who 25 tmpdXXTj devolves (upon us): see 

II. 7. 2] 1266 a 15 1266 a 39. 261 

\ e ^et Be teal Trepl TTJV aipeaiv TWV dp^ovTWV TO ef alperwv (III) 
alpeTovs eTriKivSwov. el yap Tives o-vaTrjvai OeXovai, Kal fjue- 
rpioi TO 7rX?7009, alel KCtTa TTJV TOVTWV alpedrjcrovTai /3ov\7)aiv. 
7 Ta fjbev ovv Trepl Trjv Tro\iTelav Trjv ev rofc VQ^OIS TOV- IV 

30 TOV e%ei TOV TpoTrov elal e Tives TroXtretat KOL a XXat, 
at /Lie* <j)L\ocr6<pa)v Kal I^IWTWV ai $e TTO^LTLKWV, nraaai (p- 37) 
Se Ta5z^ fcaOe&T rjKViwv Kal /ca@^ 09 TroXtreuozmu z^w 
eyyi/Tepov elat, - TOVTWV d^oTepcov. ovSel? yap OVTG 
Tr)v Trepl TO. T/cva KoivoTTjTa /cal 

35 KeKaii OTOjAijKev, OVT Trepl TO, crvGcriTia, TWV 

2 aXX CLTrb TGOV dvayKaiwv dpyovTai /j,d\\ov. SOKCL 

Tien TO Trepl ra9 ovaias elvcu [dvajKalov] /AeyicrTov rera- 
xQai KO\O}<? Trepl <ydp TOVTWV TroielcrOai ^aai ra9 o-racret9 irav- 

39 Ta9. ^to OaXea9 o 

30 Krohn pronounces the whole of c. 6 as far as rp6irov to be spurious and of late 
origin, but see Int. p. 33 n. 4 and Comm. nn. (213, 215) |[ 3r ai 1 /ue^ 0tXo<To0coj/ 
/cat ISiwruiv at 5e TroXiriKtSv Spengel, al 1 yu^i/ iSiUT&v at 8k <pi.\off6<f)wv Kal TTO\LTLKO>V F 
II Ar. Bk., ai ptv idtWTUv Kal (piXoaofiuv at 5^ TroXmKwi Piccart. See p. 80 || 
37 avayKalov erased by p 1 , omitted by II 2 Ar. Bk., possibly a variant of ^yiarov || 
39 <a\X<tas II 1 , and so throughout H irpurov Q b Ar. perhaps rightly, Trpwrws Piccart 

on I. 13. 13 and reff. there given, A 33 TOIJTWV d|JL<}).] that of the Republic 

further use of the participle is seen in and that of the Laws. 
the Gortynian inscription lately found, 35 o-vcrcriTia TWV yvvaiKcav] Comp. 

ol eTTi/SaXXoyres ols e7ri/3<xXXei, the next 6 5 with n. (196): also n. (153) on 5 

of kin on whom certain obligations de- 2 and (116) on I. 13. g. SUSEM. (231 to) 
volve. Cp. \eKTeov Kara rov eTrt/Sa XXorra 36 TWV avcryKcucov] the necessary con- 

\oyov De gen. anim. I. 2. i, 716 a3: and siderations of every-day life as opposed 

Pol. vi(iv). 13 7 r6 iroffov eTrt^dXXet. to its luxuries or ornaments : practical 

26 TO If; aipercov alpTOvs] it is un- requirements )( fanciful theories. 

safe to elect from a larger number previ- 2 37 ptyurrov Terd\Qa.i] The sen- 

i ously elected. This would be done in tence is inverted; with rcraxdai Ka\ws 

the election to the Council, and in the take TO ire pi rds ov<rias ; the infinitive 

election of vo/j.o(f>v\aKes. First 300 were clause so formed, TO Trepl... Terdx^o-i., is 

chosen, then out of these a hundred, subject of 5o/cet elf/at (MtyicrTov. Some 

and out of the hundred thirty-seven. hold the right regulation of the relations 

It was partially so in the election of of property to be of the utmost import- 

the Supreme Board of Control. SUSEM. ance. There has been no lack of re- i 

(231) presentatives of this view. Ap_art_ froox - 

27 o-vo-TTJveu] This apparently por- physiocrats old and new, we may refer to 
tends something like the wire-pullers and M. de Laveleye Primitive Property Pre- 
caucus of our day. Comp. vm(v). 3. 9. face xxvii xxxii, also pp. 149, 158 ff., 223. 

c. 7 Examination of the polity pro- 39 816 4>a\ as...TrpwTos] From c. 8 

posed by Phaleas. See Analysis p. 105. i (comp. Exc. n to B. n) it is clear that 

1 31 For the antithesis comp. i. 7. Phaleas was younger than Hippodamos: 

5 TroXiTeiWTai 17 0tXo<ro<oD0-u>, II. 12. i but if Trpurros is the right reading, he 

OVK CKOtv^vriaav Trpa^euv TTO\I.TI.K<JJV ou5 must have come forward with his poli- 

UVTIVUVOVI , ctXXa 5ieTAe<raj idiuTetiovres tical scheme before Plato published either 

rbv fiiov : PL Tim. 19 E TO 5^ r&v ao- of his. This conjecture finds support in 

(picrTuv 7&>os 0o/3o0^at ^ a&Toxov a^a the apparent meagreness of his proposal, 

<pi\ocr6(f>(s}i> avdp&v y Kal TroXtTi/cw. its lack of all finished execution as com- 


^crl rydp 


[II. 7. 2 

1266 b 

Sew iaa$ elvai, T9 KTrj(rei,s TWV f jro\LTWV. rovro 2 
evOvs ov %dXe7rdv wero iroielv, ras 



ep<ya)$eo-Tepov /u,eV, 
ofjia\io-6?ivai TCO ra? Trpoi/cas rou? /u-ez; TrXofcrtou? 



6 wero 


TO 1)9 5e 
Se roi)? 
irXelov Be 



rov 7rei>Ta7T\ao-lav elvai rfjs e\a- 



Trep eprfrai Kol irporepov. 

Set Se fiijBe TOVTO \av6aveLV TOVS OVTW vofjbo6eTovvra^ r o \av- 
Oavei vvv y OTL TO r^9 ova las rdrrovra^ 77X17^09 7rpocrr)Kei Kal rwv 
TO 7r\rjdo^ TaTTeiv eav "7^/3 v7Tpaiprj T^9 overtax TO 

o TCOI^ TZKVWV dpiO/jios, avd^Kfj rbv 76 vofjiov \veo-9ai, Kal 

1166 b 2 5 ^817 T, 5r) P 1 !! 2 , 5e M 8 Ar. || 3 ras omitted by M 8 ? 1 , [ras] Susem. 1 
perhaps rightly || 5 [nXarwj ...8 Trporepov] ? Susem. The brackets are necessary if 
Schmidt is justified in rejecting 1265 b 21 26 (see Comm.) || 6 eci? omitted by II 1 , 
[<F<J>] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger op.c. p. 1359 f. || 9 ^ Bender || 12 TOJ/ re 
M s U b 

hindrances to this hypothesis. SUSEM. 

3 1266 b I v0vis should be taken 
with the participle. 

2 Tctx.i(TTa] The expedient of modern 
writers for bringing about this much de 
sired equality is limitation of the right of 

4 6 lav = laisser faire. 

8 Kal irpo repov] 6 15 ;/. (213). 
Hence if that be bracketed the same 
suspicion attaches to this one. SUSEM. 

5 9 8ci 8e p.T)8e KT\] This remark 
was made before, 6 10 13, cp. n. (2 ro). 
It is strange that Aristotle does not refer 
back to that passage. SUSEM. (234) 

11 virepaipTj^ exceed, rise above. If 
the number of children becomes too great 
for the size of the property. 

12 avd-yKTi...\v(r0ai] Schlosser thinks 
this remark unfounded, because Phaleas 
is only speaking of landed property, as 
Aristotle says himself, 21. And he re 
minds us of the custom in some parts of 
Germany where only one child (the eldest, 
or the youngest, or any one whom the 
father chooses) succeeds to the real 
estate and provides portions for the rest 
at a fair valuation. But he should have 
reflected that Phaleas Plato Aristotle all 
alike exclude the sons of citizens from 
engaging in any trade. SUSEM. (235) 

pared with the Platonic schemes (comp. 
nn. 255, 256 on 8 3, 4). According 
to Aristotle s account, Phaleas thought 
there was no more to be done when once 
he had demanded an equal division of the 
land into inalienable and indivisible lots, 
and the preservation of this equality by a 
uniform education which is not more 
minutely described, and when he had 
recommended the degradation of artizans 
to the position of public slaves. He had 
nothing to say about the size or number of 
these lots, about moveable property, or in 
fact hardly anything else. The spirit and 
tendency of these proposals strongly sug 
gest the idea expressed by Bockh Staats- 
haushaltungder Ath. I. p. 65 and Roscher 
Thukydides p. 247 that they concealed a 
practical aim : that he wanted to restore, 
in his Dorian native town especially, the 
old aristocracy of well-born landholders. 
Henkel Studien p. 165 further remarks in 
support of this view that popular rule 
found its way first into Byzantium, B.C. 
390, and thence to Chalcedon, under the 
influence of the reviving strength of the 
Athenian Demos: Xen. Hellen. iv. 8. 27, 
Theopompos Frag. 65 in Athenaeus xn 
526 D. At the same time, he adds, it 
must be remembered that the absence 
from Phaleas scheme of the warlike spirit 
of a chivalrous aristocracy, and his silence 
as regards everything military, are great 

II. 7. 7] 

1266 a 401266 b 24. 


pi? r?79 \vaews (f>av\ov TO TTO\\OVS e/c ifKovor iwv yivecrOai Trevrjras (IV) 
6 egyoy yap ^ vecorepoTroiovs eivai TOI)? rotourof?. BIOTI ^ev 4 

15 ovv e^ei Tivd ^vvafjuv et? rrjv TroXiTi/crjv Koivwv iav ri TJ9 ov- 
<jm? o//,aXoT77?, KOI rwv iraXai rtz e? fyaivovrai SieryvwKOTes, olov 
teal ^6\wv evofAoOervja-ev, teal Trap aK\oi<$ eari VOJJLOS o? KW\vei 
KTaaQai yrjv oayv av j3ov\r]Tal Tt?, 6/zota)9 Be KOL rrjv 
overlap 7r(ii)\LV ol vofAOL KwXvovcnv, cocrTrep eV Ao/cpois 
20 ecrrl /Jirj TrwKelv, edv ^rj fyavepdv drv^lav Sel^rj 
7 /cvlav, eri Se roi)? TraXatou? K\rjpovs Siao-w^eiv (TOVTO &e \v- 
Qev fcal Trepi AevKciSa 8ij/jiOTLKTfjv eiroirjcre \iav TTJV iro\iT&iav 
avrwv ov yap en crvveftcuvev djro rwv wpicr^evwv Ti/bi^fjid- (p. 38) 

ecrrt TTJV Icror^ra jJL,ev 5 

18 biroa"r]v Aid. Bk., oiroffriv or Sffijv AY., OTTOCTI^V P 2>3 - 4 Q b T b U b |] 19 of j/o/xot] 
?woi Biicheler, probably right || 24 lart] ets r6 P 3 - 4 U b Ar. Aid. and P 2 (ist hand, 
yp. fan corr. 3 in the margin), ets Q b T b 

\wpls = quite apart from the violation 
of the law, it is a defect that many citi 
zens should decline from wealth to 
poverty. Comp. 5 2, xw/ats 0,71-0. 

13 <|>avXov KT\] Comp. 6 13 n. and 
iv(vn). i6 15 ff. n. (946). SUSEM. (236) 

14 Hpyov to be taken as b 2 t~pyu- 
SfoTepov itjs_hard for such people not to 
encourage sedition. In ill. 15. 8 also 
Zpyov eVr = it is improbable, in the same 
way as /xoXts with difficulty comes to 
mean hardly ever. 

6, 7 The influence which equality 
of possessions must exercise upon civil 
society was recognized (i) by Solon s legis 
lation, (2) by laws which fix a limit to the 
accumulation of landed property, (3) by 
the laiv of Locri which forbids the sale of 
land, (4) by a law of entail, as at Leucas, 
where the disuse of the law altered the 
constitution to an advanced democracy. 
Yet the size of properties needs regulation, 
if, when equalized, they are not to be over- 
large or over-small. 

Compare c. 12 10 (Philolaos at 
Thebes), vn(vi). 4. 9 (the Aphytaeans 
and Oxylos in Elis), vin(v). 7. 9 (Thurii). 
See further Laveleye op. c. pp. i6r 165 
Eng. trans., A. Lang Essay xin, esp. p. 
89 ; all attempts to restrict the sale of 
land and to keep it parcelled out in small 
lots may be taken as survivals of early 
custom. An early equal distribution 
(Maine s Village Communities p. 81), 
perhaps a periodic redistribution, was a 
tradition to the early lawgivers of Greece. 
Long after them Phaleas, and Plato in 

the Laws, 744 E, desire a return to the 
old usage. 

SIOTI |xv...6|Jia\oTT]s] At this point 
then Aristotle s own socialism begins 
to come out more clearly than before. 
See notes on 5 7 (158), 15 (166); 
6 1014 (208211), and 7 5 (234). 
Further comp. n. (192) and Introd. 
p. 33. SUSEM. (236 b) 

1 7 Like the law of Oxylos prohibiting 
mortgage, vn(vi). 4. 9, Solon s o-eiadx- 
deia, or relief measure, restored mort 
gaged lands to their proprietors : yij 
fj.\aiva TTJS eyu TTOTC | opous a<pei\ov TTO.V- 
ra^ou TreTrr/yoras | TO TrpocrOe dov\euov(TCL 
v\iv 5 tXevdepa. His graduated assess 
ment must also have tended somewhat to 
equality. But in addition to this Scho- 
mann, Antiquities p. 330 Eng. tr., and 
Curtius, Hist. \. 329 Eng. tr., represent 
Solon as enacting a special law, that there 
should be a maximum limit to the acqui 
sition of landed property : Grote (in. 182) 
thinks no such inference borne out by 
the present passage. 

Trap aXAois] It is not known where. 

19 Iv AoKpois] Presumably the Epi- 
zephrian Locri, where Zaleucus was legis 
lator, c. 12 6. 

7 22 Kdl irepl AevKaSa] Cp. vn(vi). 
4. 9 r\v 5 TO ye ap-^ouov iv TroXXcuj TroXecrt 

Trpwrovs K\rjpovs with note, and on the 
custom at Sparta, c. 9 14 n. (300). 
SUSEM. (237) 

24 oXX &TTI filv KT\] But then 
there may be equality of possessions and 

264 nOAITIKIlN B. 7. [II. 7. 7 

25 vTrdp xeiV T?79 overlap, ravrr]v Be T] \iav elvai Tro\\r}v, coo-re (IV) 
rpvcfrdv, TI \iav o\lyrjv, ware %rjv y\io"xpa)s. $f}\ov ovv &$9 
ov% Ifcavov TO T9 ovcrias IVa? rcoir^aal rov vofjLoderrjv, d\\d 

s rov fJ^eaov aro^ao-reov. ere S et, rt? /cat T?}I> per p lav rd^eiev 

overlay rrdcnv, ovSev o^eXo? /nd\\ov yap Set ra? 
tao o^aki^eiv rj ra$ ov<7ias, rovro S ouV eVrt /AT) rr 

\ l/cavci)? VTTO rwy vofJMV. a\)C laws av elrreiev o $aXea<? on 6 

I ravra rvy^avei \e<ycov avro? olerai <yap Svolv rovroiv I<j6- 
rrjra Selv vrrap^eiv ra?9 TroXecriz/, Krr]0 eo)s KOI iraib 

9 d\\a rtfv re rrai^eiav r)ri<$ ecrrai, Set \e<yeiv, KOI TO 

35 eivat, /cal rrjv avrrjv ovSev o<^>eXo9 ecrTt 7-/o rrjv avrr/v 
elvai KOI jjuiav, d\\d ravrrjv eivai roiavr^v e f 779 ecrovrai 
rrpoaiperiKoi rov rr\eovKrelv i] %pr)fjiara)i> r) rtp,f]s fj crvva,^- 
10 (poreptov, eVet (rracrid^ovcriv ov JJLOVOV Sta rrjv dvicror rjra rfjs 7 
Kr/jcrecos, d\\d KOI Sid rrjv rwv n/jicop, rovvavriov $e Trepl 

40 efcdrepov (oj^ /ueis ydp 7ro\\ol old ro Trepl T9 Krr]creis dvi- 
1267 a aov, ol ^ Se xapievres Trepl rwv ri^wv, eav Icrai o0ev fcal 

ev 5e ifj ri/jirj T^/XCI/ KG/CO? rj8e KOI ecrdXos), 

T apparently || 28 raet M s P 1 || 31 af e iiroiev M s , elVot af 

P 2 - 4 -Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. and a later hand in P 3 , cfaoitv P 3 (ist hand) || 38 evel... 
1267 a 17 TToXiretas 1267 a 37 ^TL...b 13 e ar^oj/. See the text arranged in parallel 
columns hitrod. p. 80 f. || e?ret Spengel, ^rt FII Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 in the text, on 
PSusem. || 39 5ta r-rjv omitted by M s , dia by P 1 

1267 a 2 5 M s P 1 - 2 - 3 Aid. || Kal omitted by T and M s (ist hand) 

yet the equal shares of citizens may be (c] for higher gratifications. Phaleas can 

either immoderately large or excessively only cure the minor social evils due to (a), 

small. but not the ambition which produces a 

26 -yXCo-xptts] stingily, so as barely tyrant. 

to make a living. Demosth. c. Arist. 30 TOVTO 8 OVK &TTI KT\] Compare 

689, 25 ws fJLLKpa Kal yXlcrxpa (S^/wocn a with what follows 5 15 //. (165 b) ; see 

OLKodofj-elre), c. Pant. *y\i<rxpws /cat /xoXts : further on 9 12 n. (296) and Exc. II on 

Plato Rep. VII 553 c yXicrxpw Kal Kara Bk. II p. 333. SUSEM. (238) 

cr^iKpov (peido [Mev os /ecu epya6/j.evos, thriftily 36 e ^ware K Ta^rys. 

and gradually, by saving and working. 10 38 o-Tao-idtovo-i] Cp. vni(v). 

28 TOV jxt crov (TTOxacTTtov] See this i. u Travraxov yap cud TO avicrov i] 

more precisely defined in c. 6 8, 9 ; ordcris. 

iv(vn). 5 i, with the notes: also 40 This opposition of ol x a P^" re ^j 

vi(iv). ii 2 ff., as quoted in n. (207). the educated or enlightened classes, to 

SUSEM. (237 b) the mass of ordinary men recurs in NIC. 

8, 9 Men s desires need to be regu- Eth. I 5 3, 4. There joined with irpaK- 

lated no less than the amount of their TLKOI, in Pol. Vli(vi). 5. io with vovv 

property : this Phaleas must admit, as %x VT *- 

he holds that there should be a public 1267 a i Idv l <rcu sc. at /cruets. 

edtication, though he does not give a i Homer Iliad ix. 319. SUSEM. (239) 

detailed scheme. Crime springs from The exclamation of Achilles, as one of 

ill-regulated desires (a) for the necessaries the nobles, at the levelling policy which 

of life, (b) for its superfluities, and for he attributes to Agamemnon. 
the gratification of the. passions generally, 

II. 7. 13] 

126Gb 25 1267 a 

11 ov fjibvov 8 ol dvdpwTTOU Sid TO, dvay/caia dSiKovcriv, wv a/co? (IV) 

elvai vofjii^ei TTJV IcroTrjra r^? overlap, ftjcrre fjirj \a)7roSvT6 iv Sid TO 
5 piyovv rj Treivfjv, d\\d /cal OTTCO? ^alpcoat, KOI /AT) eTridvfjLtoO lv 
lav yap /JLel^co eywaiv iTTiQv^lav rcov dvay/caiow, Sid rrjv 
12 TavTT]^ larpelav dSi/ctjaovo-iv, ov TOIVVV Sid Tavrrjv fiovov, 
/cal dvev i^riOvfjawv, iva ^aipwai, rat? avev \VTTWV 

rl ovv a/co? TWV rpicov TOVTCOV ; rot? JJLG.V ovcrla /3pa- 8 
/cat epyacrla, rot? Se (rcotypoavvr) rptrov S\ et Ttz>e? 

/ a (\>f / >,\><x >\ \ 

Q ot awrwv %aipeiv, OVK av eTTifyroLev eu firj irapa 
a/co?. at 7<x/9 a\\ai dvOpcoTrwv* Seovrai. eirel 
ye rd peytarra Sid ra? V7rp/3o\d$, d\\ ov Sid 
rd dvaytcala, olov Tvpavvovcnv ov% Iva firj piywaiv (Bio KOLI 

3 Susem. 2 , 5 FJIAr. Bk. Susem. 1 3 in the text [| 8 cij/eu eTn0viJ.tuv or 
ai>eTri6vfj,r)TOi (cp. Clem. Al. Strom, vn. p. 742. A. B.) Bojesen, av CTridvfJLOiev FII 
Ar. Bk., av /XT) eirLdv^waivl Schneider following Lambin s translation, Bernays omits 
the words || u Stivaivro] POV\O<.VTO P 1 II 2 Ar. Bk. perhaps rightly . || avruv P 1 , 
atrtav T M 9 P 2 - 3 4 Aid. || 12 e?ret H Ar. Bk. : 2rt or eirei <5 > Rassow. Then 
the apodosis begins with wore. William does not translate eTret : hence [eVei] and 
adiKovcri 5^ Susem. 1 - erroneously for dSi/coOcrt ye 

11 Shilleto pointed out that these 
three causes of crime strongly resemble 
those which are mentioned in Rhct. I. 12. 
17 d8iKov<n 8e rot)s x VTa * ^v avrol ev- 
5ee?s r els TavayKcua rj els vwepox^v 77 els 
a,Tr6\av(Tiv, where see Cope s note. 

6 <xv -ydp }] sc. TTJS rCov dvay- 
Ko.lwi> eTridv/Jitas For if the desire goes 
i beyond the necessaries of life. Compare 
Nic. Eth. VII. 4. 2 1147 b 23 ff. effTLV ra 
jj.ev ava.yK.cua. T&V TTOLQVVTUV -rjdovrjv, (viz. 
TO, crw^tart/cd, e.g. TO, Trepl rrjv rpo(prjv,) ra 
5 alpera fJiev /ca0 aura e-^ovra 5 inrep- 
[3o\r)v ; these are OVK avaytcala ; VIKTJ, 
Tijj,r), TrXoOros are examples : and VII. 14. 
2 1154 a 15 ff. TUV 5e ffw/j.aTt.K&v ayad&v 
eanv VTrepf3o\ri, /cat 6 0aOXos T diuKeiv 
rrjv vwep^oXrjv (sc. </>aDXos) ecrrlv, d\X ov 
ras avayKaias (Congreve). SUSEM. (240) 

12 8 rats dveu \vrrw v ^Sovais] 
Comp. Nic. Eth. vn. 12. 2 1152 b 36 ff. 
^?ret /cat dvev \virrjs /cat eiridvfjLias elviv ij- 
8ovai, olov at roO deupeTv evepyeiai : X. 3. 
7 1173 b 1 6 ff. dXvTTOt yap elcnv at re /j.adt]- 
/uan/cat /cat rwi /card rds alcr6r](reis al Sid 
TTJs 6ff<t>pr)ffe<as, /cat d/cpodyuara 5e /cat c5/)d- 
fjiara TroXXd /cat /cat e\TrLSes. Taken 
from Plato /%//. 51 B 52 B where occur 
at Trepl rd /caXd \eyo/j.eva xpw/xara /cat Trepl 
TO, (rx^iwara, /cat rcoi 6ff/j,uv at TrXetffrat, 
/cat at rwv <j>doyyuv ; also ai Trepi rd /xa- 
ijdoval. (Eaton.) SUSEM. (241) 

One could hardly have supposed that 
this la^t was a fruitfuLiiQurcc of crime. 

(> <XKO9] Here is a digression into the 
region of practical suggestions and expe 
dients, in the same spirit as vn(vi). c. 5, 
vni(v). cc. 8, g. 

10 Ip-yourta] constant employment. 

<r4>pocrijvr|] Cp. n. (206 b) on 6 9. 
SUSEM. (242) 

Here this word means self-restraint 
generally, and not thrift, as before. 

u Trapd <j>i\oo"o<j>ias] As in 5 15, 
culture. The education of the citizens 
and the elevation of the masses are the 
leading ideas of B. v(viii). 

12 al -yelp d XXai sc. r]8oval. 

clvBpwirttV Stovrai] Compare Nic. Eth. 
x. 7. 4 1177 a 2 7 ff- r ^ v ^ ev y&P ^pos 
ro ffiv dvayKaiuv..,, rots 5 rotourots viz. 
rots 7rp6s TO ffiv dvayxaLois, iKavus KexopfJ- 
6 fj.ev diKaios 5e?rat Trpos ous 5t/cato- 
i, /cat /ue0 cSv, ouolus 8e Kal o 
<r<j)<f>pwv /cat 6 di Spetos /cat T&V d\\wv 
e/cacrros, o 5^ cro(p6s /cat /ca0 avrbv w... 
8/m.ios avTapKeffTaros: IX. 4. 5 n66a26f. 
(Eaton). SUSEM. (243) 

13 14 Tupavvovo-iv ov\ fra |x-q p.] It 
- is not to keep out the cold that men be 
come tyrants. Cp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 7 1134 
b 6 ff . jjucrOos dpa rts Sore os < eirel ovQev 
avrf Tr\eov elvai 5o/cet, etVep 5t/catos>, 
roOro de rt/x.7j Kal ye pas 6 ry 8e fj.T) LKavd rd 


nOAITTKflN B. 7. 

aTroKTeivrj Tt9 ov 
ra? JUKds aSt/aa9 

[II. 7. 13 


K\7rrrjv aXXa (p. 39) 


ert ra 77oXXa j3ov\6TCU 9 

KOI 7-019 



77/009 T^I 



15 at Tt/u-at /Lte^aXat, a 
Tvpavvov} ware 77/009 
14 6 r/007709 r>?9 <E>a\eou 

/caraa/cevd^ecp e &v rd 77/009 
Set Se /cat 77/009 7-01)9 yeiTvtwvras 
20 ava^Kalov dpa rrjv nro\iTeiav 
776/ot 779 eicelvos 

KTrjcrea)?. Set yap ov /AOVOV 77/009 Ta9 77oXtrt/ca9 
iKavrjv vTrdp^eiv, aXXa /cat 77/009 Toi)? e^wdev KLV- 
SioTrep ovre Toaovrov Set 77X^09 virdp^ew wv ol 

teal KpeiTTov? 
ov SwijaovTat rovs 
vaaOai 7r6\e/jLov VTreveyKelv 
7^09 //-e^ oi)z^ ovSev SiGopi/cev, Set 
(7V/JL(f)epi 77X77^09 ovcria^. tcr&)9 

17 e n ra ...... 37 7roXio/>/a as transposed by Susem. to follow b 13 

Susem. 1 wrongly from William, /u>Aet K 



o S_e 
ov9* OVTCOS 6\l yr)i> ware fjurj $i>- 

/cat TW^ o/uioiwv. e /cet- 10 
/it?) \av6dveiv, [o,J rt 
a/ot<7T09 0/009 TO /ZT) \vcri- 

eareov \\ del 
dai ? Schmidt, 


j ,^ 

/Soi^Xerai /caratr/ceuafea^at ? Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger <?/.<:. p. 1365, j3ov\everai. 
KaraaKevafait M s || 20 apa] 7ap ? Koraes, but see Dittenberger /. c, || 24 cSt ] 
wcrre Spengel, but see Vahlen Aristot. Aufsatze II. p. 21 (Wiener Sitzungsber., phil.- 
hist. Cl. LXXll. p. 23) || 25 7ri8vfj.ov<ni> P 1 , einQvfj.ov M s j| a^vveadai Ridgeway 
|| 26 oi> r <ovaiav>? Schmidt, but Krrjffiv can be understood from what precedes || 
28 [5e?. ..b 13 ear^oi ] Bender, [Set. ..37 TroXtop/ci as] Susem. 2 , probably right : see 
Comm. || TI Coming, 6 TL Stahr Susem. 1 in the text, on T II Ar. Bk., $ ri 
Lindau. Bender retains 6Vt and suggests 7r\rj66s <rt> 

rotaOra, ourot yiyvovrat.Tiupa.vvoL : IV. i. 42, 
1 1 22 a 3 ff . : meanness is shown in petty 
gains, those who take on a large scale, 
despots who plunder cities and not tern- 
pies, are called Trov-rjpoi, dcre^ecs, a5t/cot, but 
not mean, dve\ev9epoi (Eaton). SUSEM. 


816] The crime is greater because the 
excuse is less : it is not did ra dvayKa ia. 
Hence the higher reward given to those 
who punish it. 

14 19 8t 8e KT\] The same criti- 
cism as was passed on the Laws, 6 7. 
That the constitution must necessarily 
have reference to the maintenance of the 
military force follows directly from the 
assumption of the military regime which 
Plato and Aristotle make without reserve. 
Cp. again vn(vi). 6. 15. 

15 24 irXtjOos sc. TT?S KT-rjcreus. <av= 
wcrre rotrwv ; as e TJS, g. 

25 01 irXT]<rfov = ol trtXas, Rhet. I. 5. 
17 where see Cope s note. 

TOVS eiriovras may perhaps 

be defended by Plato Phacdrus 260 B 
7ro\/ut-tovs d/afoeiv. But see Critical Notes. 

27 ir6\e[Aov...6|jiouov] to support a 
war even with an equal or similar power, 
tcroi /cat 6^10101 = a state of the same stand- 
ing, an equal. 

16 We should not fail to decide 
what limit to property is advisable. 

28 8ei 8e KT\] This limitation has been 
sufficiently noticed in the preceding 15, 
yet the repetition might be justified, if it 
now appeared under a new form, much 
sharper and better defined. This would 
not be the case unless the second expla- 
nation of 29 t <rws ovv KT\, as given in the 
next note, were correct. But, as is there 
shown, this can hardly be accepted. That 
being so, there is certainly then fairly 
good reason to suspect, with Bender, that 
it is now appended solely for the purpose 
of introducing the anecdote about Eubu- 
los. SUSEM. (246) 

29 i <rws o3v...3i ova-Lav] Perhaps i 
the best limit of wealth is that its excess | 

II. 7. 18] 

1267 a 15 1267 a 37. 


30 reXeiv 
17 OUTW? 

to? a 

Kol jur 

Sid rrjv vTrep^dX.rjv TroXe/xetz/, aXV (IV) 
pvrwv ToaavTriv ovalav. olov EvySou- 

Xo? A.vrocj)pa8drov /-teXXoz TO? Arapvea nroKiopKeiv e/ceXev- 
aev avrov, crKe^rdfJievov ei> TTOCTW Xpovp \r]^rerai TO ^wplov, 
\oyto-acr0ai, rou %povov rovrov Trjv Sajrdvrjv e6e\eiv yap e\ar- 
35 TOV TOVTOV \a(Stov e/c^eiTreiv rjSrj rov Arapvea ravTa & el- 
irwv e7rot??cre TOV A^vro^paSdrrjv crvvyovv ryevbfJievov Traixra- 
18 crOat, T?;? 7ro\topKia$. || ecrrt fjiev ovv TL TWV crv[Ji<$>ep6vTtoV TO n 

34 e6e\eiv Mv T? (dcbere William) |] 35 e/cXtTreu II 2 Bk. || 37 fort ^j/...b8 
dSt/cwj/rat, with which goes b 9 01) ...... 13 eartov, is believed by Susem. to be another 

recension of the preceding 1266 b 38 e7ret...i267 a 17 TroXtrei as. See Iiitrod. p. Si 

should not make it profitable for the 
stronger to attack us, but should leave 
them no motive for so doing which they 
would not have had, even if our posses 
sions had been less. The ellipse may 
be filled up thus, dXX OL^TWS TroXe/xeu/ Xu- 
ffiT\iv ws dv e TroX^uTjcrcw /cat fj.ri exovTWi>, 
sc. T&V rjTTovojv, TOffavTTjv ovaiav. C.)iH 
wealth should never tempt aggression : 
we should then only be exposed to the 
same attacks as a poorer state in our 
place. That is, we should aim at being 
the lean wiry dogs with whom their 
neighbours are glad to make common 
cause against fat and tender sheep : 
Republic IV 422 D. 

A less simple rendering has been pro 
posed : that is the best limit of wealth 
when a stronger power does not find it 
profitable to make war upon us for the sake 
of the excess of the booty to be gained over the 
costs of victory, but when (even if it con 
quers us) it is no better off than if it had 
not made so great an acquisition. This 
suits the sequel better, but somewhat 
strains the meaning of vireppo\r)i> and 
ovffiav, besides leaving a harsh genitive 
absolute: a\X ourws ffv/jL(f>^peLV ws av avv- 
(f>epe /XT; XOVT(J}V (T&V KpeiTrovwv) Toaavrrjv 
ovaiav. It can hardly be right. 

17 During the last years of Arta- 
xerxes Mnemon and at the commence 
ment of the reign of Artaxerxes Ochos, 
the confusion in Asia Minor, more parti 
cularly owing to the revolt of Artabazos, 
the satrap of Phrygia Lydia and Paphla- 
gonia, suggested the idea of wresting a 
part of the Hellenic lands on the coast of 
Asia from the Persians. The requisite 
means for effecting this were secured, and 
it was even possible to maintain the 
severance. Eubulos was a Bithynian by 
birth, a money-changer, i.e. banker, by 
trade, and at the same time d 

</>oj, i.e. probably one of Plato s scholars, 
like his freedman and successor Hermeias. 
Through the medium of his business he 
found he could execute such a scheme as 
this, and make himself absolute ruler 
(rvpavvos) of Atarneus on the Aeolic coast 
of Mysia, and of the stronghold of Assos 
in the Troad with the adjacent districts : 
Vita Aristotelis in Westermann s Bioypd- 
0oi p. 402, Suidas s.vv. Apto-ror^XTys, 
Ep/xct as, Strabo xm. 6:0. Bockh (Her- 
jneias of Atarneus in his Gcs. Kl. Schriftcn 
VI. 183 ff.) tries to show, as others have 
clone, that this event happened before 
359 B.C.; that in 359 Autophradates as 
general of the Persian king marched 
against Artabazos and took him pri 
soner, and that in the course of this 
same campaign he laid siege to Atarneus. 
The suggestion by which Eubulos raised 
the siege is, as Bockh remarks, one worthy 
of a banker. We know that he main 
tained his power down to his death : also 
that it was not before 345/44 that his 
successor, the eunuch Hermeias, Aris 
totle s friend (see I. 6. 9. n. 56) was over 
thrown by the Rhodian Mentor, the 
Persian commander-in-chief, and that 
solely by stratagem deceit and treachery. 
SUSEM. (247) 

Bergk s posthumous paper On the chro 
nology of king Artaxerxes ///, Ochos, in 
Rhein. Mus. xxxvu. 1882. pp. 355 362 
fixes the fall of Hermeias and the escape 
of Aristotle and Xenocrates to Mitylene 
(and thence to Athens) in the year 345/44. 
Comp. Susemihl in Bursian s Jahrcsber. 
XXX. 1 882. pp. 4 7. 

36 o-vvvow yev^ffBat, to become \ 
thoughtful, to reflect. 

That 1820 are parallel to 10 
13 has been explained Introd. p. 80 f. 

18 37 fon ^...38 TroXirats] Comp. 
line 3 wv a/cos... 4 over las. 



[II 7. 18 

ov<ria<s i<ra<$ elvai rot? 
7rpo9 aXX^Xou?, 01) /x?) 
40 ^apievTes dyava/CTOiev [av] 
19 fyaivovTcu, 7roXXa/c/9 eTTiT 
1267 b ?) Trovrjpla TWV dvOpwirwv 
vov Stft)/3oX/a JJLOVOV, orav 

737)09 TO /LM) vraGid^iv (IV) 
ovSev 0)9 euTrelv. KOI yap av ol 
OVK i<ra)v oVre? a^ioi,, Sto /cat 
Kal crrao-tafo^re? erf S 
v, /eal TO TTpwTOV uev i/ca- 
TOUT 27 Trdrpiov, del Seov- 

rai TOV 7rXetWo9, eft)? et? aTretpov e\0(0o~iv. direipo^ yap rj 
Trjs eTTiOvalas (fivers, 779 777)09 TT)Z^ dvcnr^pwcriv ol TTO\\OL 

ovv TOIOVTWV apxr), /j,d\\ov TOV T9 ovo~ias ojj,a- 12 
i> ) TO TGI)? yu-ei eTriei/cels TTJ (frvcrei, TOIOVTOVS Trapao-fcevd- (P. 40) 


21 Tat. 
10 ydp 

TOVTO eo~Tiv, av TJTTOVS Te CDCTL /ca /U-T 
u /caX&)9 Se oi)Se T?}^ lo-oTijTa Trjs overlap eipijice 
KTrjcriv to~aet uovov, GCTTL Se /cal 

38 i cras after elvat II 2 Bk., perhaps T; possibly right || 40 av II 2 Bk., omitted 
by n 1 

1267 b 5 ap%?7 is corrupt: OL/CTJ Scaliger, a/cos Schneider, apuyri M. Vermehren, 
aX/CT; ? Madvig probably right, < aTraXXcry^s > or <tar/oeias> dpx 7 ? Schmidt; dp/eel 
Koraes, certainly not right 

38 irpos TO p,i] <rTCuriaiv recalls 
aTaaia^ovffi of 10. 

39 ov (JLI^V lAc -ya KT\] a 16 wVre TT/)OS 
rds /xt/cpas dSt/vi as /crX. 

Kal -yap av KT\] "For even then (eav 
I crai at /cTTjcrets, 10) the higher classes 
would be discontented, as they lay claim 
to something more than an equal share, 
and hence are often found aggressive and 

40 OUK urwv] dXXd ir\elovos . on the 
ground that they deserve something more 
than an equal share, something propor 
tionately greater. Comp. ill. 13. 13 and 
Thuc. VIII. 89. 4 Trcu res "yap avdri/mepov 
a^iovcnv 00% OTTWS t uoi dXXd /cat TroXi) ?rpw- 
TOS avrbs ^/cacrros etj>at. In Thuc. I. 132 
2 /XTJ arcs = superior. 

19 1267 b 2 8iw(3oXCa] This refers 
to the so-called OeupLKov, a grant of pub 
lic money to provide for shows or public 
amusements introduced at Athens after 
Pericles time. In the first instance at 
those festivals only at which plays were 
exhibited, the sum of two obols, the price 
of an ordinary seat in the theatre, was 
paid from the state-chest to the lessee of 
the theatre for every citizen present. 
(Every one who went to the theatre re 
ceived a counter which he gave up on 
going in; the lessee collected from the 
state the two obols for every counter; but 

he had to pay a rent out of his receipts 
and to keep the theatre in repair. See 
Benndorf Bcitrdge in Zeitschrift f. d, ost. 
Gymn. xxvi. 1875. p. 23 ff.) Subse 
quently the poorer citizens received the 
like dole for all the other festivals, and 
these outgoings swallowed up no small 
part of the revenues. See Bockh Public 
Econ. of Athens p. 217 Eng. tr., Scho- 
mann Antiquities I p. 341, p. 438 ff. Eng. 
tr. An Attic obol= 1*3^. of our money, 
a little more than five farthings, or 1 1 
German Pfennige: Hultsch Greek and 
Roman Metrology p. 172. SUSEM. (245) 
4 il^s irpos TTJV avairX-rfpoxriv KrX] 
Comp. a 5 STTWS %atpwcrt /cat /HTJ eTTidv/J.w<nv. 

20 6 TO TOVS |A^V...7 irXOVKTlv] 

Substantially the same remedy as in 12 
rpirov 5 et Ttfes...d :os. 

21 The argument from inconsis 
tency is pressed from opposite sides here 
and in 6 15. Phaleas must have meant 
to include personal property, 3. 

10 O-TI 8c Kal SovXwv KT\] Comp. 
Rhet. I. 5. 7 TT\OVTOV 5e /m^prj vo^la^a.- 
TOS Tr\TJdos, yrjs ^wpiwv KTTJffis, TL de 

7rL7T\(i}V KTTJfflS Kal (3 ff K 7) /J. d T W J> Kal 

av8pair6duj>, where Cope explains ?TTI- 
?rXa as "moveables" opposed to fixtures, 
such as houses and land. Hence furni 
ture, even if of bronze, Xen. Oecon. ix. 6, 
Thuc. in. 68. 

IT. 8. 1] 

1267 a 38 1267 b 22. 



KOL fiocr/crjfjidTayv TT\OVTOS /cal vofj,lcrjj,aTos, KOI KaraaKevrj (IV) 
7ro\\rj TWV Ka\ov/Jieva)v eTriTrXwv rj nravTwv ovv TOVTWV i&o- 

fyrrjreov r} rd^Lv TIVCL fjuerplav, rj Trdvra eareov. (jjal- is 
verai S 6K TTJS vofjioOecrias Kara&fcevd^cov rrjv TTO\LV JJLL- 
/cpdv, el y ol re^vlrai iravre^ 8rj[j,6<riot eaovrai KCU yu,?} 
7T\fjpcofjid TL Trape^ovrai, rrjs TroXeco?. XA, elrrep Set Sij- 
[jLocriovs elvcLi I TOU? ra KOIVCL epya^o/ji^vovs, Set Kaddrrep Iv 
ETTiSd/jivw re, /cal Afoc/xx^To? Trore KaredKeva^ev AOrji ijo-i,, 
TOVTOV e^eiv rov Tpoirov. 

Trepl fiev ovv T?/? OaXeou TroXtre/a? a^eSop IK rovrwv av 
Ti? Oewprjaetev, ei TL Tvy%dvL Kd\(a$ eipTj/ccas 77 fir) /ca- 

09 /cat TTZ/ TCOZ^ V 

16 5eZ] 5^ r 3 - 4 Q b T b U b L s Ar. Aid. and P 2 (rst hand, emended by corr. 1 ) || 
17 Set] /cat with a comma after 16 etVep Bernays ; if so, epya^o/j^vovs <jj.6vovs> 
Susem.; probably right, but see Comm. The same sense can be obtained by Well- 
don s punctuation e iirep Set 5??/xo<rt ous tivai, TOI)S ra KOLVOL epya fo^vovs Set, Kadcnrep 
provided ws be inserted after 18 re /cat || 18 ws inserted by Morel Bk. before Ato- 
0a^ros, omitted by II ; the translations of William and Ar. are no warrant that they 
had ws in their mss. || 21 rt] rts II 2 || 22 [6s ..... 28 /SouXoyue^os] Congreve j the 
passage had been suspected by Fiilleborn. See Comm. 

22 15 8r|[Ji6crioi public servants. 
Such were the executioners and physicians 
always (see III. n. 1 1 dy/Movpyos = larpos) : 
also vavir-rryol and others, Plato Gorg. 
455 B with Dr Thompson s note, Politi- 
cus 259 A. 

16 irXi]pw}Jia rt Trapeoi>Tai. TTJS iroXecos] 
Exactly Plato s expression Rep. 371 E 
TT\rjp(>}fJia drj TroXews et crt /cat (Uffdurol 
(Eaton). SUSEM. (248) 

Comp. in. 13. 13, vi(iv). 4. 12. 

23 17 4v EiriSdp-vo) KT\] "No 
one but a political dreamer or dreamy 
politician like Phaleas could hatch the 
thought that the handicrafts throughout 
the city should be carried on by public 
slaves. The proposal made at Athens by 
Diophantos, we do not know when, was 
that only the artizans who worked for the 
community were to be public slaves"; 
Bockh Staatsh. i. 65. [not in the Eng. 
trans.] This was certainly the case at 
Epidamnos. With the present text this 
sense can only be obtained by interpreting 
the words roi>s ra KOLVCL tpyafypfrovs to 
mean those who do common work for 
the whole community ; and we should be 
forced to assume that even Phaleas pro 
posal went no further than this, which is 
very improbable. Hence the alteration 

suggested by Bernays is tempting. The 
archon of the year Ol. 96, 2 = 395/4 was 
named Diophantos, but he can hardly 
have been the man. " Aelian relates that 
the people of Epidamnos allowed any one 
who liked to settle amongst -them as a 
resident, E7rt<5a /mot eTrtS^ea /cat /meroL- 
/ce?f irapeixov rc3 /SoiAo/ieVoj : V. H. III. 
16" (J. G. Schneider). But this fact 
throws no light on the passage. On the 
constitution of Epidamnos see further in. 
16 i, vm(v). i 10, 4 7 nn. SU 
SEM. (249) 

Bernays renders: "But if (this propo 
sal is to be tried), state-slaves ought only 
to be employed upon works for state 
objects, and the arrangement must be 
made as it is found in Epidamnos and as 
Diophantos wanted to introduce it at 

c. 8 Examination of the scheme of 
Hippodamos of Miletus. This chapter 
is analysed p. 105 f. 

1 22 I7rird8a(ios] See Excursus 
II to B. n p. 331 ff. : also K. F. Hermann 
De Hippodamo Miles Jo (Marburg 1841). 
SUSEM. (250) 

This chapter is treated slightly by 
Hildenbrand pp. 58 61, Oncken i. 
213 218, Henkel 162 ---165. See also 



[II. 8. 1 

Bialpeo-Lv evpe Kal rov Tleipaia Karere^ev, ryevbpevos (V) 

Kal 7Tpl TOV 0\\OV /3lOV TTeplTTOTepO? Bid fylkOTllJiiaV 0#Tft>9 

25 ware Boxeiv evlois ^TJV rrepiepyorepov rpiywv re 7r\r)@6i, 
real KOfJiT]^, eri Be ecrOfJTOS eureXou? l^ev aKeeivr/^ Be OVK 
ev TCO ^eifJiwvi fiovov d\\d Kal Trepl TOJ)? depivovs 
vovs, Xo yio? Be Kal Trepl rrjv o\r)V (frvcriv eivai yS 
TTpwro? rwv fir) Tro\irevo^ev(ov ev6%eipr]<Te n Trepl 

2 elrrelv T?;? dplcmjs. KareeKeva^e Be , rr)v rrb\iv TO> Tr\rj0ei 2 

31 /jLev uvplavBpov, et? rpla Be fjieprj Birjprj/jievrjv eVo/et yap . 
ev fJLev [Aepos re^Wra?, ev Be yewgyovs, rplrov Be TO irpo- 

3 7ro\e/Aovv Kal rd o7r\a e-^ov. Biypei 8 et? rpla fiepr] <Kal> rrjv ,. 

23 Tretpea (not iraipea as Susem. 1 gave) P 2 - 3f4 Q b T b (?) U b || 26 
TroXureXet II 2 Ar. Bk. Bernays and yp. p 1 in the margin, /caAXwTricruy Bender, 
/coa-^y Ridgeway, KOff^ffea-iv Welldon || ?TI 5e omitted by T h Sepulveda s codices 
Bender Ridgeway Welldon, e^ Bernays || 28 Xo7os T 2 - 3 T b , cr7rou5a?os W b L s 
Ar. Aid. || 32 nev omitted by M 9 Q b || 33 ra L s and U b (corr.), rb M 8 ? 1 - 2 - 3 4 
Q b T b Aid. and U b (ist hand) || <Kal> rty Schmidt 

M. Erdmann On Hippodamos and sym 
metrical town architecture in Greece in 
Philologus XLII. 1883. pp. 193 227. 

22 6s Kal... 2 8 pov\6|ievosj Fiilleborn 
remarked long since : "every reader must 
be struck with one strange thing in this 
introductory notice by Aristotle, viz. the 
picture he draws of Hippodamos. With 
what object has he preserved for posterity 
these proofs of the man s vanity and 
effeminacy? Do they serve to explain 
the spirit of his work? I doubt it." And 
Congreve, who rightly holds that this 
description would be more consistent 
with Theophrastos than with Aristotle, 
suggests that here we may reasonably 
suspect a later hand. SUSEM. (252) 

23 KaTtT[j.v] cut out, i.e. laid out the 
streets; Pindar Pyth. 5. 84 evdvro^ov 
Kartdr] K... ffKvptaTav odov. 

25 TJ V -rrfpiep-yoTepov] was held to 
be somewhat affected in his way of life. 

In the following words effdrjros must 
be taken with TrX^ei according to the 
reading of II 1 adopted in the text. It is 
plausible to make it depend upon some 
word like KOff/j.^, the reading of II 2 (so 
Ridgeway, who quotes Aeschyl. Supp. 
246 for /co<r/u,os, meaning fashion or style of 
dress), or possibly /caXXojTrioyi^; or Koa- 
fj.r)<reai, which are the conjectures of 
Bender and Welldon respectively. 

Tpixv re irX^Gei Kal KOH.T]S] In Sparta 
it remained the custom, on account of 
war and warlike exercises, to wear long 

hair from the time of entering upon the 
military age. But at Athens from early 
times it became the practice to cut the 
hair upon attaining the full age for civic 
rights and to wear it short from that time 
onwards. Not to do so passed for vanity, 
foppishness, dandyism. The orator He- 
gesippos, a contemporary and supporter 
of Demosthenes, was on this account 
nicknamed Kpw/WXos or Top-knot. The 
knights alone are said to have kept the/ 
privilege of wearing longhair: /j-r) (pdoveW 
-r^fuv KOfj-wai, Aristoph. Knights 580. See 
Becker Char ikies in. 233 ft. ed. 2, Eng. 
trans, pp. 453 55. SUSEM. (251) 

26 evreXovs] of cheap material, though 

28 Xo-yios] a man of learning, as in 
iv(vii). 10. 3 and often in Herodotos (Con 
greve). Suidas calls him fiereupoXoyos. 

2 30 TTJV iroXiv] Oncken I. 214 
n. (i) takes this to mean that in the 
10,000 are included not the citizens only 
but the entire free population. But ac 
cording to the design of Hippodamos 
7, not merely those who bear arms but 
also the artizans and husbandmen are to 
be citizens, although it must be conceded , 
to Aristotle s criticism 8 12, that hisi 
end could hardly have been attained in 
such a manner. SUSEM. (253) 

3 33 8iiipi 8 ls rpCa |ApT] KrX] 
So too Aristotle iv (vn). cc. 9, 10. 
(Eaton.) Cp. n. (365) on II. 10 8. 
SUSEM. (254) 

12G7b 231268 a 3. 


II. 8. 5] 

%ct)pav, rrjv /JLCV lepdv rrjv Be BrjfjLoo lav rrjv 8 IBlav oOev (V) 
35 fj,ev rd vofja^p^eva TTOL^O-OVCTL rrpos TOI)? Oeovs, lepdv, </> wv 

S ol 7rpo7ro\ejjiovvT<; fticacrovrai,, KOIVTJV, rrjv Be TWV <yea)pya)v 
4 IBiav. wero 8* eiBvj Kal TOJV vofjiwv elvat, rpla JJLOVOV Trepl J 

cav yap al Blfcai, <ytvovrai,, rpla ravr elvai rov aptO/mov, ,( p- 4 

vj3piv fi\d/3r)v Odvarov. evofJioOerei Be Kal iKaarr)piov ev 
40 TO Kvpiov, et9 o Trdaa^ dvdyeo-Oai, Belv T? ftrj Ka\a>s KCKpl- 4 

orOau BoKov&as Bl/ca^ rovro Be fcareaKevafcev etc nvwv ye- 

=268 a / , vc^v/ * / ^v 

5 povrcov atpercov. ra$ oe Kpiaeis ev Tot? bucaarripiois ov oia 

qiero ryiveaOai Beiv, d\\d (frepeiv etcaarov m- 

vaKiov, ev a> 




35 lepa P 3 Q b T b L s and P 2 (ist hand, emended by corr. 2 ) || 37 5^ Kal 
apparently, possibly right || 40 Set II 1 

1268 a 2 $ero omitted by W b L s Aid., in P 4 inserted in the margin || 3 
SiKafci P 1 and ist hand of P 2 - 3 (emended by corr. 1 ) || rrfv 8iKr)i> omitted by II 1 

35 ci<j> 5 wv 8 KT\] Here there is just 
a germ of Plato s ideal state, when we 
consider that the soldiers answer to the 
second order, and the artizans and far 
mers together to the third order of citi 
zens in the Republic, However even when 
viewed in this light the differences be 
tween the two schemes are as great as 
the resemblances. But the state proposed 
in the Laws may be described as hardly 
I anything more than an improved working 
out of Phaleas ideal. Comp. L. Stein 
op, c, p. 162 f. SUSEM. (255) 

4 37 wTo KT\] See Exc. II. to 
B. ii p. 333 f. SUSEM. (255 b) 

1//3/31S and /SXa/Sr? answer to crimes 
against the person and against property. 
Not precisely however; for i7/3pis implies 
insult ; it is whatever wounds the feelings 
or honour, whether accompanied by vio 
lence or not. Whereas /SXci/S^ implies 
loss or damage sustained, whether to per 
son or property. See Rhet, I. 12. 26, n. 
2. 5 with Cope s excellent comments. 

39 lvofjLo0Ti 8*...] This idea of a 
court of appeal is further evidence that 
Hippodamos had a fine sense for juris 
prudence. It is appropriated by Plato/ 

also Laws vi 767 c E, xn 956 c f.j 
(Oncken). Cp. also Exc. n. SUSEM. l 

40 TO Kvpiov = the supreme coui t. 

5 1268 a i ov 8id \|/Ti<|>ocj>opas] In 
the Athenian courts the voting was secret: 
each juryman (SiKacrrrjs) received two 
ballots, one for condemnation, the other 

for acquittal; and there were two urns, 
one of copper, into which the ballot con 
taining the verdict was thrown, the other 
of wood, into which the other, unused 
ballots were thrown. The ballots for 
voting were either differently coloured 
stones or small metal balls, or even dif 
ferently coloured beans or shells. At 
what time the one or other of these were 
used is not known. Stones were cer 
tainly the most common; a black stone 
served for condemnation, a white one for 
acquittal: with balls of metal, one with a 
hole in it served for the former purpose, 
a whole one served for the latter purpose. 
Equality of votes was counted as acquit 
tal. (Meier and Schomann Attische Pro 
cess 720 ff.) SUSEM. (257) 

Aristotle himself is our authority for i 
the voting at Athens: see Frag. i548b 
541 of the Berlin ed. 

2 dXXd (|>e peiv ^KCUTTOV KT\] Nearly 
the same arrangement was actually intro 
duced amongst the Rojnans : a fact which 
shows how clearly this proposal testifies 
to a legal mind of great originality. At 
Rome the voting was by tablets in the 
manner here proposed, leaving it to the 
iudices to affirm not simply condemna 
tion (C) or acquittal (A), but also a ver 
dict of "not proven" (NL, non liquet)., 
That Aristotle ( 13 f.) is as yet quite un-l 
able to realize to himself the proper mean-i 
ing of the proposal is a further proof on 
its originality. (L. Stein.) Comp. n. \ 
(268) on 1315- SUSEM. (258) 



[II. 8. 5 

S CLTTOXVOI 7T\W?, KCVOV <eCLV>, i Se TO_Jl6eZ> TO Se fJbrf, TOVTO (V) 

5 Stopl^ew, vvv yap OVK were vevo/JboOeTTJaOai, /caXo)? avay/cd- 
6 eiv yap eTTiopfcelv [17] ravra TJ ravra Si/cd^ovTas. en Se 4 


OTTO)? Tvy%dva}cri, ri/jbrj^, /cal rot? TTCLKJI TWV ev rep 7roXe/-t&> re- 
\evTwvTwv etc BrffAOfflov yLveaOai TTJV Tpo$>r]v y GO? ovjrco TOVTO 

10 Trap 1 aXXot? vevo/^oOeTTj/juevov e&Ti &e KOI ev KO^vais ouro? 

7o vbfjios z Oz /cat eV eTepcus TWV 7r6\ecov. TO*)? S ap^ovTas VTTO 
TOV Bij/jiov alpeTovs eivcu Travra^ ^JJLOV 8 eTroiei Ta Tpia 
fjieprj TT;? Tro/Veo)? TOI)? 8 alpeOevTas eTrifJueKelaOai KOIVWV 

KOI %VIKU>V KOI 6p(f)aVlK(jOV. 

15 ra yu-ei ouz^ Tr/Vetcrra /cal ra yu,aXto"ra d^Lo\oya Tr/s ^TTTTO- 5 

4 diroXi^ei M 8 P 1 Q b , aTroXi^croi L 8 || <eai > Meier (Z?^ ^w damnatorum p. 58) 
|| </ccu> TOVTO Meier /. r. perhaps rightly || 6 T) omitted by F M s , ^ raura omitted 
by L K and P 1 (ist hand, both words added by p 1 ) [r/] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger 
op.c. p. 1360 f. || ri 5e ert ^et vo^ov P 4 in the margin, in the text eritfei is omitted, 
en 0ei 5^ voftov P 2 3 Q b T b L s Aid. Bk. || 9 TOVTO] TOTE and 10 "EXA^o-ip instead 
of aXXois Spengel, but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1369 ff. and Comm. || u erepots 
P 3 - 4 Q b T b L s Aid. and P-(isthand, emended by corr. 2 ) || I^TTO TOV drj/j-ov after 12 
aipeTOvs II 2 Bk. || 14 /cat &VI.KUV omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, supplied by p 1 
in the margin) 

5 ava-yKCt^eiv sc. TO 

6 9 a>s ovirw KT\] "just as if this 
law had not been made before elsewhere." 
So K. F. Hermann De Hippodamo p. 44, 
who is defended by Dittenberger (Gott. 
gel. Anz. 1874 p. 1369) against Spengel. 
It is true that d>s with the participle 
might equally mean (i) because in fact, 
as in PL Phacdr. 245 E ws TOLVT-^S ova-r^s 
(pvaeojs, or (2) because as he thought (ws 
OVK dv o.oi >va.Tov 5 6) : but vvv is not de 
cisive in favour of (i), see n. (259). 

oi irco, not /T^TTW; cp. Lysias 14 10 
CToXfj-rjaev ava^ijvai, cl;s OVK ^<rofj,evov Ty 
TroXet 5iK7]i> \a.jji^ia,veLV : 27 16 ojcnrfp TOV 
dveidovs aXX 01) r-^s fa/m-las avTols fj.e\ov : 
Xen. Cyr. v. i. 13 cos OVK avayKcuov r6 
/cX^Trretj/, at rta Tdi> /cX^Trroz/ra. The clause 
is virtually oblique, and the negative is 
reproduced unchanged. 

10 &TTI 8^. ..vvv] Here as often vvv 
as things are, " under the existing system " 
not simply = now, as Spengel explains it. 
Unless one follows Spengel in an unten 
able alteration of the text, the drift of the 
passage can only be a censure upon Hip- 
podamos, which is even in this form 
quite intelligible, though it would cer 
tainly have been more clearly expressed 
as follows : "whereas a law like this was 

already at the time in force at Athens." 
We cannot however prove the date of 
this Athenian regulation (on which Wila- 
mowitz Ans Kydathen p. 26 may also 
be consulted), but the present passage 
would seem to make it earlier than the 
treatise of Hippodamos. It is quite pos 
sible that Aristotle s censure is unfair; 
for who is to inform us that in its author s 
intention the scheme of Hippodamos was 
restricted to new proposals, never before 
realized? Cp. Hermann op. c. 43 f. 
SUSEM. (259) Cp. for vvv 5, c. i 3, 
3 6, 5 ir, 17, 6 n ovx 6/iotws TOTC 
(in Plato s supposed state) /cat vvv (as 
things actually are), Rhet. I. i 4, 1354 a 
19 KadaTrep ev eviais ye vvv ecrrl TUJV iro\ewv. 
7 ii rods 8 d pxovTas KT\] All 
officials (perhaps even the priests) were 
consequently to be appointed by popular 
election and not by lot; com p. Excursus 
ii p. 332. SUSEM. (260) 

12 Srjfiov. . .iroXews] It would seem 
that Hippodamos did not state whether 
all three classes were eligible (Oncken). 
See however n. (262). SUSEM. (261) 

13 TOVS 8 cupeQe vTcts] the magistrates 
elected to have the charge of state mat 
ters and of the affairs of foreigners and 
minors in the city. 

II. 8. 11] 1268 a 41268 a 36. 273 

Sd/Aov Tafe&>9 ravr eo-riv diropr^o-eLe $ civ rt? -jrpwTov ^ev TT)V (V) 

8 SiaLpea-LV rov 7r\r/0ovs rwv 7ro\LTa>v. OL re jap re^ylrai, KOI ol ye- 
copyol KOI ol ra ovrXa e^ovTes KOLVCOVOVQ-L r^? TroXtre/a? TrdvTes, 
ol pev yecopyol ov/c e%oz/re? OTrXa, ol Se Te^yl-rai ovre yr)v ovre 

20 OTrXa, ware yivovTai o-^eSov SOV\OL TWV ra ovrAa fceKT^/^evcov. 

9 fiere^eiV pev ovv irao-wv TWV TL^WV dSvvaTov (avdy/cTj yap e/c 

TWV ra O7r\a e^ovrwv KadlcrracrOaL KOI arparrjyov^ KOI TTO- 

Xtro^>i/Xa/ca9 Kal ra? KVpicoTara? /3%*> w? eiTrelv} IJLTJ 

^ere^o^ra? Se T^? TroXtre/a? TTW? otoz/ re ^tX^cS? e^e^z/ 

25i7T/?09 r?}^ 7ro\iTeiav, aXXa Set /cal Kpeirrovs elvai rou? ra oVXa 6 
76 KetcT7]^evovs dpforepcov rwv pepcov TOVTO S 01) 

10 /AT) TroXXoi)? oVra?" et Se TOUT CO-TCLI, TL Sel TOVS aXXou? 

T?}? TroXtTe/a? /cat Kvpiovs elvai T^? TCOZ/ dp^ovrcov xa- 
eVt ot yecopyol TL %p7](rifjLOl, rfj TroXe^; Te^/Ta? 

rya/j dvay/caiov elvai (7rd<ra yap Selrat, TTO\^ re^virwv], ( P . 42 ) 
Aral Bvvavrai Siayivea-Qai, KaOaTrep ev Tat? aXXat? vroXe- 
criv ^aTTo Tr/? re^vr]^ ol Se yecopyol Tropi^ovres yuez/ TO?? Ta 
o?rXa KeKTyiJievois rrjv rpo(f>rjv i>\6ya)S av rjadv TL T^9 TTO- 
Xea>9 yLte/309, z^w 8 t 3/az^ e%ov<TLV, Kal TavTTjv ISla yewp- 

11 yrjO-OVO-LV. GTL Se T?)V KOLVTjV, d<p J ^9 Ofc 7rp07TO\/jLOVVTeS e^OVCTL 7 

36 TT}^ Tplocfrr/v, el fjuev avTol yewpyija-ovcrLv, OVK dv ely TO fjid- 

17 ol omitted by M s P 1 , [ol] Susem. 1 || 25 /cat omitted by H- Ar. Bk. || 26 76 
omitted by IVPP 1 , [ 7 e] Susem. 1 - 2 || 34 t .5/a] idiav II 1 || 7eco/37oua-t// Ar. Morel Bk. 

16 Ta^tws] scheme, polity: cp. 10 (1573), of a magistracy under this name 

^4, n 8. The fuller phrase is rdis in Larisa. SUSEM. (263) 
TTJS TToXin/c^s Koivuvias I. 2. 1 6, or r^s As ra7ot are attested by an inscription 

TroXtret as II. 6. i, where the sense of for Larisa of 2 14 B.C. (Ridgeway Trans- 

ordering, arrangement, is as apparent as actions n p. 138) it seems likely that Aris- 

in n. 2 4, or^ii. 9, or in. i. i. totle there uses a different term in order 

a-irppTJo-eie 8 av TIS irpwrov] Aristotle to express the functions of the office. 
criticizes ( 815) (i)the entire division 24 ^ p,Te xovT<xs Si KT\] Aristotle 

into classes, (2) the special position of himself altogether excludes the farmers, 

the agricultural class, (3) the innovations tradesmen, and artizans in his ideal state 

in the administration of justice. from the rights of citizenship; which is a 

8 20 8ov\oi] This partly explains much stronger measure. But possibly he 

the ^proposal of Phaleas to make them thinks it is not essential for those who 

drjfMcrioi. are thus excluded to be attached to the 

9 21 fJLTe xeiv n*v ovv TTCUTWV KT\] constitution, but that if they are to be 

Yet Aristotle seems to assume this to citizens, it is. SUSEM. (264) 
have been the intention of Hippodamos. 1^ 31 Sicr^veo-Oai^earn subsistence; 

oUSEM^. (262) SO Kara^nv, Karayiyveffdai. 

Obviously he is applying his own 33 v\6<yws civ KT\] They would 

standard TroXmjs 6 ^r^v dpxrjs. then be in the position of the 8^/j.os of 

22 iroXiTo^vXaKas] what sort of ma- the Republic. 

gistracy Aristotle understands by this 34 vvv 8 = whereas what Hippoda- 1 

word is not clear and is not sufficiently mos proposes is that they shall have land 

explained by the notice, vin(v). 6 6 n. of their own. 

H. 18 

274 nOAITIKHN B. 8. [II. 8. 11 

erepov real TO yewpyovv, jSoiikeTai 8 6 vofjLoOerrjs el (V) 
erepoi rives ecrovTai TWV re TOL US La yecopjovvTcov KCLI T(i)v 
[AaYL/cLcov, reraprov av jAopiov eorrai TOVTO TTJS 7roXeo)9, Ofoe- 
12 z;o? /^ere^ov, aXXa aXKoTpiov TT}? TroTuret a? aXXa /jLrjv ei 
41 Tt9 TO?)? avrovs 0rjcrei> TOVS re rrjv ISlav /cal TOL>? rrjv KOLVTJV 
<yetop<yovvTa<; } TO re 7rX?5$o9 airopov carat, TCOV /capTrwv e% wv 
1268 b eWcrro? yeco^ijo^i &vo ol/clasj /cal TWOS - eve/cev OVK evOvs 
arro T^? 7^9 /cal rwv avrwv K\rjpwv aurot? re rrjv rpo<f)r)v 
\r]-^rovTai /cal rot? /za^/yLtOi9 Trape^ovaiv J ravra S>) rravra 
13 x^j, e^et rapaj^v. j ov /ca\&)9 3 ouS o Trepl r^ 

5 e^et vojjiQSj TO Kpiveiv afyovv SialpovvTas 7-179 S//C7 
ryefypajjupevTjs, /cal ^iveaOai TOV SifcacrTrjv ^iaiT rjT ^v. TOVTO yap 
ev fJ^ev TT] SiaiTrj /cal TrXetocrt^ eVSe^erat (/coivo\oyovvTar yop 
d\\rj\oi<; irepl TTJS /cplcrea)s), ev Be rot9 Si/caaTripiQis OVK 
, oXXa /cal TovvavTiov TOVTOV T&V vo^oOeTwv ol TroXkol 

37 yewpyefv MT 1 || erepov ttvai after vofj.o6^Trjs F M s , a similar gloss TOJ/TOUS 
elvat p 2 in the margin || 39 au] ovv II 3 || rouro after TTJS TroXews M s P 1 |] 
42 Spengel thinks Kaptrwv corrupt, Schmidt suspects &Tropov, for which dvcnropiffTov 
seems to him to be required by the sense 

1268 b i yeupyricrei II Bk., ministrabit William, habeant ministrare Ar., doubtless 
on mere conjecture; hence erroneously virovpyrjcrei Vettori Susem 1 2 and others || 
dvo oiKias can hardly be sound, dvalv ot /acus Ar. Camerarius, <els> duo oi /a as Ber- 
nays, 5vo [ot/cias] Busse not happily || 2 rrjs < avrrjs > Bocker (not bad), 
<6 \7?s> rfjs Madvig, [/cat] Bernays Susem. 2 ; there is some corruption || 5 TO Kpivew 
a^Louv II Bk. , 6 Kpiveiv aiuv Susem. 1 2 wrongly from the translations of William and 
Ar. || diaipovvra P 2 3 Q b T b Aid. Bk., dicupovvrai L s || diKtjs II 1 Ar., Kpiveus II 2 
Bk. (which Bojesen saw to be wrong) || 6 70,^ Ar., 5 Til Bk. || 7 /cat </XT?> 
TrXet oa-tv ? Koraes || g /cat omitted by TM S || TOVTU ruv p 1 P 2 3 4 Q b T b Bk., 
W b L s Aid. (omitting the following T&V) 

11 37 |3ov\Tai KT\] Comp. n. /cd^et rb d /mr/, 5) when the charge in 
101) on 6 6. the indictment is simple, whereby the 

12 42 TO re TrXtjOos diropov KT\] juror is turned into an arbitrator." dtotiv 

"the amount of produce will be in- is^ infinitive. 

adequate for the maintenance of two 6 TOVTO yo.p KT\] This is practic- 

establishments." This again is a mere able in arbitration even (/cat) where there 

assertion which ought to have been are several arbitrators, for they confer 

proved. SUSEM. (265) with one another about the decision. 

1268 b i yecopYqcm oUCas] See 7 Kal irXeioo-iv] At Athens a single 

Critical Notes. It is impossible to defend public arbitrator decided each case, but if 

the text as meaning to maintain two house- private arbitrators were chosen by the 

holds by agriciilture on the analogy of ol- parties to the dispute themselves, a body 

/etas olKeiv. of 3 or 4 might well have been more 

13 4 6 irepl TTJS Kpfrrews] the law common. SUSEM. (266) 

about passing sentence. 8-^dv 8e TOIS SIKCUTT.] In this respect 

5 TO Kpviv diovv KT\] " the require- then the practice in the Greek courts of 

ment that a verdict shmll be returned justice w^s just the reverse of that in 

upon separate counts (rb ptv sc. /caradt- ours. SUSEM. (267) 

II. 8. 16] 

1268 a 37 1268 b 23. 


10 Trapacr Kevd^ovonv OTTO)? ol BifcacrTal /AT) KOivoKorywvrai 777509 (V) 

14 aXX^Xou?. eTreiTa TrcS? OVK la-rat rapa^a)Br}<; rj Kpicns, orav a 

fjiev 6 Bi/cacrTrjs oirjTai,, /JLTJ TOGOVTOV 8 ocrov o Bi- 
o /J,GV yap eiKocri fjiva^, o Be Bocderr)? icpivel 
Be/ca IAVCLS (i) o jjuev 7r\eov o _ e\ao-aov\ a XXo? Be Trevre, o 

15 Be reTTapas (KOI TOVTOV Brj TOP rpoTrov Bfj\ov OTL fAepiov- 
15 criv), o i Be Trdvra KaraBifcdo ova iv, ot 8 ovBev. rt? ovv o rpo- 

TTO? earai T?/? Bia\,oyrj<; TWV ^rj^xov ; en [ ] ovBeis etriopKelv 
dvayrcd^ei, TOV aTrXco? dji -oSi/cdo -avra 77 KaTaSi/cdaavTa, ei- 
7Tp arrXft)? TO y/c\7j/j,a yeypaTTTdi, Bucal&V ov yap /Lt^- 
20 Bev 6(f)L\iv 6 dTToBiKdcras Kpivei, d\\d r? eitcocn fjuva^ (p. 43) 

aXX etcelvos rj^rj tiriopKei 6 /caraBLKacra^ /jirj VO/JLL^WV o<f)el- 
16 \eiv ra? eiKoori //.m?./ 7re^>l Se roi) rot? evpiaicovcri n rrj K 

(? 8et ylveaOal nva rifJi^v, OVK ecmv ducjya- 

12 /xi> after 6 II 2 and perhaps F 
13 Kpurei Bk. 2 , Kplvfi TIT Ar. Bk. 1 || 

(rst hand, corrected in the margin) || 178 omitted by II 1 | 
Susem. 1 , perhaps rightly || 21 d\X ...22 /xi/Ss omitted 

|| 5^ P 1 , omitted by M" and perhaps F |j 
15 Sr,] dt H 3 || 16 ou5eV] otf T M s and P ] 
19 yeypairrar 5t- 
by M s || 21 ^5?? 

omitted by F M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added by corr. 1 ), [175??] Susem. 1 wrongly || 23 

M s pi 

a smaller sum. 

21 T) 8ii] when we turn to the judge 
who condemns while not believing the 
twenty minae to be owing, it is quite true 
that he commits perjury. Comp. vm 
(v). 8. 6 uxrirep drj/Aos TJd-rj ol 6p.oi.OL (Cope). 

1315 L. Stein op. c. 162 ;/. 
rightly calls this whole criticism a misap 
prehension. If the judges, or jurors, are 
forbidden to converse with one another, 
it is certainly impossible for them to find 
non liquct in concert : it is however pos 
sible for all to reach the same result with 
out consultation, and still more likely that 
only in this way can some one of them 
clear his conscience. And if, after the 
fact of a pecuniary indebtedness has been 
established, the jurors cannot agree upon 
the amount, then a conditional verdict 
is the only one possible, and in that case 
certainly there can be no final decision 
except by way of compromise. Thus this 
objection makes for Hippodamos, rather 
than against him (Oncken). And lastly 
how is it made out that the majority of 
legislators were right in excluding con 
sultation amongst the jurors? At any 
rate our modern regulation (see n. 267) 
has pronounced them to be wrong. Cp. 
also n. (258) on 5. SUSEM. (268) 

16 23 OVK do-<t>a\s] "the proposed 

I 8 2 

14 12 6 8iKa^6|ivos may be either 
litigant. If the participle is passive, it 
denotes the defendant ; if middle, the 
plaintiff. Here the latter is the case. 

13 o [&v -ydp... 15 TTrapas] " For he 
(the plaintiff) claims 20 minae, but the 
juror will decide for ten or whatever 
the larger sum may be which is claimed 
by the former and the smaller sum which 
is awarded by the latter while another 
(juror) will award five, and yet another, 
four " (Bernays). This seems slightly 
better than to understand TrXelov, ^Xatr- 
<7ov, Trtvre, r^rrapaj of sums awarded by 
different jurymen (dicasts). 

15 jitpiovwi] will estimate damages 
according to a graduated scale. Comp. 
Demosth. adv. Lcpt. 494, 4 5e? roivvv 
fjLfj.epi(T6aL TO. r&v 8wpe&v. 

15 1 6 ris ouv 6 rpoiros] In what 
way then are the votes to be counted, i.e. 
sorted? 810X0777 = collecting and arrang 
ing: diribitio Cic. Pro Plancio 14. 

19 el irep a, < irXws...8iKa<os] "if the in- 

rdictment has been framed (not condition 
ally but) absolutely with justice." (It 
has also been proposed to put a colon be 
fore SIKCU WS: "and justly too; for &c."). 
If the suit be for 20 minae, acquittal 
means that the defendant does not owe 20 
minae, it says nothing about liability for 


nOAITIKflN B. 8. 

[II 8. 16 

fjiovov eye i (V) 


\e? TO vo/AoOerelv, d\J)C ev6(f>@d\iJ,ov 
25 yap avKO(f)avTia<; Kal Kivrjcreis, av 

iriTTTei S 6t? a\\o 7rp6/3\iifjia KOI aKe^iv erepav aTropovai 

yap rives Trorepov {3\a/3pov i) av^epov rat? TroXeai T<J 
17 Kivelv TOI)? Trarpiovs VO/AOVS, av rj rt? aXXo? /3e\riwv. SioTrep 

ov paSiov TCO Xe%#ezm Ta^u (rvy^aypelv, elirep /JLVJ o-v/Jicfre- 
30 pet, Kivelv. ev^e^erai yap elcrrjyelcrOai Tiva$ VO/ACOV -\vcriv r) 

TroXtreta? a$9 KOIVOV dya66v. evrel Se TreTroiij/jieOa fjLveiav, 11 
18 en jJbiKpov Trepl avrov SiaareiXacrdat^ fieXnov. e%ei yap, 

wo-Trep eiTTOfjiev, airopiav, Kal $6j;ei6V av (BeKnov elvai TO\ 

Kivelv. ejrl yovv rwv ci\\a)V eTTiar^fjidov rovro avvevr^vo^ev] 
35 olov larpiKrj KivrjOelcra Trapa ra jrarpia Kal yv^vaaTLKr^ 

Kal 0X0)9 at re^vat, Traaai KOI ai Svva/jieis, war eVet /jiiav* 

rovrwv Oereov Kal^rrjv 7ro\iTiKr)v, $rj\ov ori Kal irepl rav-\ 
19 T7]v avayKalov o//-ota)9 e^eiv. aTj/jieiov 8 av yeyovevai (fraiiy ) 

rt? eV avrdov r&v epycov roi)9 yap dp%aiovs VOJJLOVS \iav { 

-*-^ ^^ <~4%^H <#/ 

27 r6 <M> ( W b L 8 Ald. 
Ar. Bk. 

30 7ap Spengel, 6 T H Bk. 


legislation is not safe, but only specious 
to the ear," a curious confusion of me 

24 ?x ei V^P KT ^1 f r ^ leads to false 
accusation and possibly to changes in the 
constitution (see n. on line 30 below). 
Informers would always claim to reveal 
facts highly useful to the state, as did the 
Roman delatores. av rvxy = should it so 
happen ; and so el TI/XOI, rvy^ov, el ^ri ^e. 

26 ciXXo irp6p\T]|xa] another question. 

curopovo-i, ydp rives] Can this have 
been in written works? SUSEM. (269) 

1625 Is it expedient to alter the 
laws of a country in order to introduce 

With this interesting discussion com 
pare Rhet. i. 15 4 12 (Spengel); also 
Plato Polit. 294 A 302. 

28 TOVS irarptovs VOJJLOVS] The an 
cestral laws would include much that is 
unwritten : customs, institutions, those 
traditional practices of the society which 
serve as a basis (0^0^ e/setV/xara) to the 
written code, Plato Laws in 680 A ovd 
yap effri TTW, dXX edeat. Kal rots 
\eyo[j,evois Trarptots i>6[J.ois eirb^evoi 0>ai. 
Comp. Laws VII 793 B D: see n. (48) 
on i. 6. i, and n. 5 5, 15. 

17 29 TW Xex.0<(vTi = t 
of Hippodamos. 

el irep JIT] <rvp.c|)ep6L Kiwiv] "in case it 

turns out to be inexpedient": i.e. if on 
the wider question we decide against 

30 evSe xcTcu "yelp KT\] "Some may 
propose the repeal of the laws or the 
constitution as a public benefit." When 
thus distinguished from TroXtrei a, VO/J.OL = 
the code of positive law. The revolution 
of the Four Hundred, it will be remem 
bered, was effected by the suspension, in 
legal form, of the ypa^-rj wapavbfj.iM, the 
great safeguard against the subversion of 
the Athenian constitution. 

32 8ia(TTLXa<r0ai = enter into detail. 
It is used in 7^opics v. 3. 8, 131 b 15, 17, 
as synonymous with SiopiffaaBai. Cp. 

the proposal 

PI. Rep. VII 535 B irola dy <5ia<rre X\ei ; 

18 33 ptXriov rd Kiveiv] This 
view is maintained 18 22. 

34 eirl -yovv TWV a\\o>v KT\] Cp. III. 
15. 4, n. (638) medicine in Egypt; 16 
7, 8: iv(vn). 2 13 n. (726); 13 2 
n. (870): in. 6 7 ;/-. (531). SUSEM. 

36 fxCav ...... 37 iroXiriKiiv] It is A- 

ristotle s invariable practice to rank Poli 
tics with the "arts and faculties": e.g. 
vi(iv). i 13, Nic. Eth. i.e. i. 

19, 20 A most valuable line of 
inquiry. We could wish he had noted 
down a few more of these antiquated 

II. 8. 20] 

1268 b 24 1269 a 1. 



yap P 2 , eo-idypofiopovvTo re yap 
6re yap Bas. 3 , e<nd rjpo(p6pow re 7<xp 
misled by William s version ; see Ditten- 

40ja7rXoO? eivai KOI {3ap/3apifcovs. ecriS?) pcxfropovvTo re jap ol r/ EX- 12 
20^7^6?, KOI T? jvvaiKas GtovovvTO Trap* d\\r)\a)v, oaa re 
jXotTnz - TWV dp^aiwv ecrri TTOV vojJiifJLWv^ evrjOrf Trd/juirav eariv, 
i26ga.\olov ev Kv/jir) Trepl rd (^ovi/cd vo^os ecrTiv, dv 

40 eo~idf]po<popovvTO re yap P 1 3 , 
P 4 , e<n5rjpo(j>opovi>TO yap Q b T b , 
Koraes, eo~iSijpo<j>opovi> yap rore Susem. 1 
berger op. c. p. 1371 

1269 a i K6/J.7] TM S 

40 (Tl8T]pO(j)OpOVVTo] ThllC. I. 5 3 

TO re ffidripofpope iffdai TOVTOLS rots yTreipu- 
rats aTro TT)S TraXatas Xr/oretas e^e^evf]K.e\ 
6 i Tracra 70,^ ^ EXXds ecridripocfropei, 8id 
rets dcppaxTovs re ot /c7?creis /cat ou/c dcr0aXets 
Trap dXXTjXous f<p6dovs, xal ^vvrjOij -Tr\v 
oiaiTav fj,ed oir\uv eiroirjo-avTO (J. G. 
Schneider). SUSEM. (270 b) 

4 1 Tas "YvvaiKas ICOVOVVTO] The suitor 
purchased the daughter of her father by 

< means of presents (eova) : see Schomann 
Greek Antiquities I. 52 [Eng. trans, by 
Mann and Hardy p. 48 ff.]. Schneider 
compares marriage by coeinptio among the 
Romans. SUSEM. (271) 

There is a valuable note on the eeova 
or bride-price in the English translation 
of the Odyssey by Butcher and Lang. 
"The eeftva. in Homer are invariably gifts 
made by the wooers to the father or kins 
men of the bride, that is, the bride-price, 
the kalym of the dwellers on the Volga... 
The father of the bride was thus said 
eedvovo-dai OvyaTpa (Od. II. 53), to accept 
certain teftva as the price for his daugh 
ter, what is called coming to terms 
about the marriage in Iliad xiu. 381 
(6(ppa...o~vvu>/meda...d/ji(f)l yd/j.^). As a rule 
the woman would go to the highest bid 
der, but in the case of a favoured wooer 
it seems to have been not unusual either 
to remit the price and give the bride 
dvdeovov (cp. Agamemnon s offer to A- 
chilles, //. IX. 141), or to return a portion 
of the eeova after marriage (Od. I. 278, 
II. 196), as is still the custom among the 
Kanekas in New Caledonia." Homer 
also mentions gifts from the wooers to 
the bride, and [j,ei\ia, gifts from the bride s 
father to his daughter: but <f>epvri, the 
later word for dowry, does not occur. 
Even in Pindar ^a is used in the sense 


of <pepvf): Pyth. 3.94. (Eaton comp 
Tac. Germ. 18 ; but that is the 
gengabe, something quite different.) 

20 1269 a i otov v KVJJ.TI] This 
forcibly recalls computation, the estab 
lished legal usage in ancient times in 

England and amongst other Teutonic 
peoples. That the oath might thus be 
employed on behalf of the accuser is suffi 
ciently attested, although cases where it 
is taken on behalf of the accused are 
usually mentioned. The Greek custom is 
confirmed by the inscription of Gortyn, 
column n, lines 36 44. The law has 
prescribed certain fines, the price to be 
paid for the ransom of an accused person 
charged with adultery and in the power 
of his captors. But he may plead that he 
was (wrongfully) seized by force : cp. 
[Demosth.] c. Neaeram 66 1367, 10 
ddiKWs eipxOTJvat ws fj.oi.x6v. If so, the 
captor must support his charge by com- 
purgators, whose number depends on the 
amount of the fine or ransom, (a) Four 
are necessary if the fine is 50, 100, or 200 
staters: i.e. if the aggrieved husband is 
a full citizen. (/3) Two are necessary if 
the aggrieved husband is an dforaipos, 
i.e. free but not a full citizen: while 
7) if the aggrieved husband is a serf 
evs), the serf s lord (Trdcrras) and one 
other compurgator must appear. The 
fine for (7) is i\ staters, for (/3) 10 or 20 
staters. The Cretan text of the law runs 
thus: at 8e Ka irovet 8o\o<radOai [i.e. eav 
8e 0UN/T7 dovXu&affdai], 0/j.ocrai TOV e\ovra TO 
irevTeKovraffTarepo [TOV Tr 
pov] /ecu TT\IOVOS TTCVTOV avTOv, piv 
[eauroj] peKaaTov eirapi.op.evov [eirapw 
TO 5 aireTaipo [TOV 5 d0erat /3ou] 
avTov, TO 8e FOLKCOS TOV trao~Ta.v orepov 
avTov, /ULOIKIOVT e\v [uoix&vd eXetV] 5oXo- 
o-aOdai 8e fj.e [fj.r}]. And if he shall plead 
that (the captor) overmastered him, the 
captor shall swear in the case of the 50 
staters or more, himself with four others, 
each imprecating on himself: in the 
case of a clanless man, himself with two 
others: in the case of a house-thrall, 
his lord with one other (an oath) that he 
took him in adultery and overmastered 
him not. See Zitelmann in Das Recht 
von Gortyn, pp. 101 107 : and Mr H. J. 
Roby The twelve Tables of Gortyn in the 


nOAITIKflN B. 8. 

[II. 8. 20 

5 21 

7rapd(T^7]TaL fjuapTVpwv 6 SIWKWV TOV $6vov TWV avTOV i(V) 
evo^ov elvai rco (f)6vw TOV (frevyovTa. proven 8e 

eicos re rou? 

ov TO TraTpiov aXXa TayaOov 

slVe yrjyeveis rjcrav etV e/c (f)0opd$ 

\ \ / \ \ > 

\ey6Tdl KCLTO, T<MV yTjjeVOlV, W(TT CLTOTTOV TO [JLeveiV ev T0fc9\ 

TOVTWV Boy/nacriv. 7T/)09 Be TOVTOLS ov$e TOVS <yejpa/jL/jievovs edv 

dfcivrjTOVS (3e\TLOv. coaTrep ydp Kal irepl 

Kal TT)V 7ro\iTiKr)V Ta^uv dSvvaTOV aKpipws irdvTa 

Ka06\ov *ydp dvay/calov ypdcfreiv, ai oe Trpd^eis Trepi 

Ka0 - efcacrTov elcrlv. e/c {lev ovv TOVTCOV <f>avepdv OTL KLVY]- 

Teoi ical Tives Kal Trore TWV VOJJLWV elcriv d\\ov Be TpoTrov 

eTTLCTKOTTovcriv ev\a3elas dv &6eiev eivai 7roXX7?9. oTav 

j ? t 

y TO fjiev /3e\Tiov fJiiKpov, TO o eui^eiv 
(f>av\ov, (j)avepov w9 eareov evlas 

(P- 4 

? - \veiv TOI)?! 
/cal TO)V\ 

6 6/j.oiws 
n 2 Bk. 

II 1 Ar. |! 7 TO omitted in 

8 eav T Ar. 

1 1 ypafirjvai 

Laii< Quarterly Review II. 1886. p. 142, 
who prefers the other rendering of do\oaaO- 
9ai beguiled, as if from do\ovi>. 

21 $ e lre yrcyevets rjerav] It is well 
known that this was the popular view in 
Greece about the oldest inhabitants of a 
country, avroxdoves ; see Preller Griech. 
Mythol. I. 62 f. Plato makes use of it 
for his myth Pol it. 271 ff., cp. Symp. 191 
r>f. In DC Gen. Aniin. ill. n. 25, 762 b 
28 Aristotle expresses grave doubts on the 
question whether such a so-called gener- 
atio aequivoca should be assumed for 
men and quadrupeds as well as for lower 
forms : yet he goes on to inquire how it 
must be supposed to take place. SUSEM. 
(272) > ^ 

eilr IK <}>0opa.s TLVOS l<r.] This agrees 
with the view explained in n. (167) on 
5 1 6, and was much more Aristotle s 
real opinion, as it was the opinion of 
Plato Timaeus 22 c : TroXAcu /cai /card 
TToXXd (f>6opal yeyovaaiv a.v9p&iruv /cat 
ZVOVTOU, Trvpl fjikv Kal vdan /mtyiffrai, 
/jLvpioLS Se d XXots erepat (3paxtiTepai : Laivs 
III 677 A ff. TToXXds avQpunruv (f>6opas 
yeyovfrai Kara/cXucr/^ois re /cat voffocs /cat 
d XXots TroXXots, ev ots /3pa%u TL r&v avOpu- 
irwv XetTrecr^at 7^0?. SUSEM. (273) 

6 ojxotovs elvai Kal] were much the 
same as the ordinary silly people " of to 
day : cp. Vahlen Beitrdge in. 314. oi 

recurs in c. 9 23, 10 10, 

ii 3- 

wo-rrep Kal Xe Yerai] Plato makes the 
same remark Politicals 274 B f. : avrol 5 
daOevels dvdpuiroi Kal d0L>Xa/croi yeyovores 
dir/pTrdfovTO UTT avrCov (sc. T&V Otj picw) , 
/cat ?r d/^r)x av L Ka i are^ Kara roi)s 
Trp&rovs TJaav XPOVOVS...CK TOVTWV iravrwv 
ev /j.eyd\ais rjffav d-rropiais. SUSEM. (274) 

Cp. Pro/lag. 321 c: man naked and 
defenceless before the introduction of the 
arts (Eaton). 

8 ovSc TOVS y - ypa|jt[jLvovs] Positive 
law as contrasted with the 5oy^ara and 
dypa(f>a vo/juua discussed in 19 21. See 
Vll(vi). 5. 2 TL0e/mevovs de TOLOVTOVS vo/movs 
/cat roi)s dypd&ovs Kal rous yey pap/me vovs. 
The distinction is best explained by Cope 
Introd. to Rhetoric pp. 239 244. 

22 9 wo-rrep -Ydp...i2 Ka0 ^Kao-rov 
clo-iv] See in. 16 1 1 with n. (652) f. and 
11. (637) on in. 15 4; also in. n 19 n. 
(579): the ruler or rulers are supreme 
where the laws cannot prescribe exactly 
610, TO ^rf pddiov elvai Kad6\ov 8iopicrai 
jrepl irdi>Tuv. SUSEM. (275) 

10 Kal(7rept)Tiiv n-oXiTiK rivTa{;iv] "So 
too in the political system it is impossible 
that all things should be prescribed in 
writing. " 

23 A sound argument, quite in Ben- 
tham s spirit. 

II. 9. 1] 

1269 a 21269 a 30. 




fcal TWV dp^ovTwv ov yap TOO~OVTOV w<^e\i -]crerai (V) 
ocrov /BXaftij&ercu Tofr ap^ova-iv apreiOelv 
Be /cal TO irapaSeiy/bia TO irepl TWV 

ov 1-* 

yap o/jiOiov TO Kivelv 

fcal vofjiov o yap VO/JLOS lo~^yv / 

ovBefiiav e^et 777)0? TO TreiOeaOai Trapa TO e0os, 
8 ov yiveTai el /JUT) 8td xpovov _779u5#o?, coo-re TO 
fj,eTafid\\eii> etc TWV VTrap^ovTcov VO/JLWV et? eTepovs 
Kaivovs daOevrj iroielv ecrTi Trjv TOV VO/JLOV Bvva/juw. 




fca KivrjTeoi, TTOTepov 
/cat TroTepov TcG 
Siaffropdv. * 

Bio vvv jjuev dfyw fjiev 
tcaipwv) Trepl 8e T^? 
Be Kal 

Travres KOI ev Trday TroXtTeta, rj 
rj THTIV \ TavTa yap e^et fjLeyd- 

TavTtjv Trjv crKetyiv (a\\wv yap 
AaKeSai/jLOvicov 7roXtT6/a? /cal T^? VI 
Trepl TWV aXXwv 7ro\iTeLwv Bvo 

17 &(f)e\ricreTal ns M s P 1 , w^eX-^crerat <6> Susem. 1 2 misled by the translations of 
William and Ar. || 18 /SXa/STjcrercu 6 Schneider || VTrdpxov<nv Bernays, which I 
should unconditionally accept were it not for the addition of /cat r&v apxovrwv after 
17 vofjLoderCJv \\ 21 wapa II 1 , TrXrji/ corr. 1 of P 2 3 , TT\T]I> trapa II 3 Bk. || 23 vofj-ov 
P 3 T b and P 2 (ist hand altered by corr. 2 ) |) 25 /cat before KIVIJT^OI omitted by FM 8 , 
[/cat] Susem. 1 2 || Ktvrirtov IP \\ /cat irdvres P 4 Q h T b L 8 Bk. || 28 8i6...1273 b 24 
noticed t>y Michael of Ephesus 

17 ov -ydp TOCTOVTOV KT\] Comp. 
Rhct. I. 15. 12 ov XucrtreXet Trapacrcxfri- 
^effOan TOV larpdv (to outdo your doctor): 
ov yap TOffouro /SXaTrret 77 a/j.apria TOV t arpou 
OGOV TO eOifccrdai aireLdetv T apxovTi ; 
Thuc. ill. 37 xefyxxri v6/j,ois a/ctr^rots 
Xpu/J-far) TroXts Kpfiffffwv fffTiv (Eaton). 
Eur. Bacchae 971 f., ou 7<xp Kpelavov TTOTC 
TWV v6[j.(i}v | yiyvwffKeiv xP~n Kai /".eXerai . 

24 19 \J/tv8os 84 KT\] These re- 
marks are very true. This is a difference 
between the sciences or arts and the laws. 
In the former only he who follows the 
science has to act and his action on an im- 
proved method proceeds from conviction: 
whereas, if the laws are altered, all must 
act according to the new law and though 
unconvinced of the need for alteration 
(Schlosser). SUSEM. (276) 

21 irapct TO 0os] "has no force to 
secure obedience apart from habit." The 
Critical Notes show how the conflate 
reading, Tr\rjv Trapa, arose. 

25 24 ^TI 84... 27 8ia<j>opdv] Plato s 
utterance Laws I 634 D exactly agrees 
with this: v[w> ^kv yap (Cretans and 
Lacedaemonians), etVep /cat /uerptas /care- 
<r/cetfa<rrai ra r&v i>6fj.uv, efs r&v Ka\\i<jTUV 

av e ir] vb[j,wv /u.rj ^ 
f.av, iroTa /caXws 
...yepwv 5e ef rts 

reiv r>v 
vruv 77 fj.7] /caXcos 
V Trap 

TT/OOJ upxovTa re /cat TT/JOS ^Xt/ctwr-^v fj.r]devbs 
evavTiov veov iroielffdai. TOVS TOLOVTOVS Xo- 
701/5. Oncken, I. 252, strangely alleges 
this passage of the Laivs as a proof of its 
author s design to strangle the healthy 
common sense of men in the name of 
political Border. SUSEM. (277) 

28 vt>v nev d4>w(JLv] See Introd. pp. 
49, 53. SUSEM. (278) 

This implies that the question has to be 
decided elsewhere in the treatise. 

c. 9 Examination of the Spartan 

See Anal. p. 106. Since Gottling s 
Exciirsiis, pp. 463 471 of his edition, 
this chapter has been most fully treated 
by Oncken I. 218 299,11.317 376, who 
writes with especial reference to Crete s 
memorable chapter on Lycurgus and, in 
vol. II, to the later monographs by Trieber 
Forschungen and Gilbert Studien. See 
p. 35 note 3. The fragments of the Poli- 
/zV.r 1557 b 38 - 1560 a 28 should be corn- 
pared. See also Jannet Les institutions 
sociales a Sfarte. 


nOAITlKflN B. 9. 

[II. 9. 1 

elcrlv al crKe^ei^ pia jjuey ei TL Ka\co$ rj fjurj /caXo5? TT/OO? TTJV (VI) 
dplaT7)i> vevo^o6eT7]Tai rdj;iv, erepa S el TL 777309 rrjv VTroOeaiv 
KOI TOV TpoTrov VTTevavTicos T^? TTpoKei/Jiev^ avrols TroXtre/o.?. ^ 
2 OTL fJiev ovv Bel TTJ p,e\\ov orr) /ca\c3? TroTuretW&u rr)v 2 
35 TWV dvayfcaiwv virap^eiv (T"%o\rjv, ofJbdXoyovp^evov GCTTIV 
e rpCTTOv vTrdpxeiv, ov paBiov \a/3eiv. tf re yap er- 

Trevea"reia 7roAA,a/a? eireOero rot? erraXot?, 
Se /cat rot? KaKaxriv ol eDuore? (ooaTrep yap efaB 

33 <r}> virevavrlws Scaliger, virevavrlw <$ w inrevavTiws> Susem. would 
prefer: but no alteration is needed |] avrols] avTrjs M 8 Q b T b L 8 and P 4 (ist hand), 
avru) P 1 , aury P 4 (corr.), aury Ar. || 34 <7r6Xet> TroXiTetfetrflai? Madvig H 37 
ireveffrla M s P 4 and P 2 - 3 (ist hand, altered by corr. 2 P 2 and a later hand in P 3 ) I! 
38 ot omitted by M 8 ? 1 !/, [ol] Susem. 1 - 2 

1 31 jiia |XV KT\] The two points to 
consider are (i) its absolute, (2) its rela 
tive success : "whether its legislation is 
good or bad in relation to the best sys 
tem ; secondly, whether it is inconsistent 
with the fundamental assumption and 
scheme of the constitution proposed." 
7rpos = when judged by a given standard. 

32 et TI irpos TI^V {nr60<n,v...t*iTevav- 
TIWS] sc. vevojj.oQ^rt]Ta.(.. So 1 8 virevav- 
rios 5e...7rpos ravrriv TTJV Siopdwcnv. 

The Helots or Serfs : 24. 

2 34 OTL [i^v ovv... 35 op.oXo yovjj.evov 
IO-TIV] Here we are allowed a very im 
portant glimpse of the nature of Aristotle s 
own ideal state. Cp. also n. (192) on 6 
5 ; c. 1 1 10 n. (393); iv(vn). 9 3, 4, 
7,8; 10 9 with n. (813), and Introd. p. 
32*. (3); SUSEM. (279) 

35 TWV dvo. YKaiwv o-^oXifv] leisure 
free from imposed labour: I. 7. 3, II. 6. 5. 

36 re followed by 38 5e. 

TJ T -ydp 0TraX(5v irveo-Tia KrX] 
Compare 5 22 n. (178). Wherever 
in Greece bodies of serfs stood midway 
between freedom and slavery, it is well 
known that the relation invariably arose 
in consequence of a subjugation of the 
earlier inhabitants by victorious invaders. 
Thus the earlier inhabitants of Laconia 
obtained the freer lot of Provincials 
(HepioiKOi) or else were forced into a de 
pendent position of this kind as Helots 
according as they submitted to the 
Spartans earlier or later, more or less 
easily, of their own free will or by com 
pulsion. See Schomann Antiquities of 
Greece I p. 191 194, Eng. tr., to whose 
account of the Helots p. 194 200 
it is sufficient to refer (comp. however 
Gilbert Studien p. 76 ff.). The Penestae 

were the descendants of that part of the 
old population of the country occupied 
by the invading Thessalians, which, in 
stead of emigrating, made a friendly 
agreement with the conquerors and con 
cluded a treaty, by which for a fixed rent 
they remained tenants of the land they 
had formerly possessed and were under 
obligation to furnish military service, but 
were not to be sold or driven out of the 
country or put to death. See Schomann, 
p. 132, Eng. tr. The authorities quoted 
by J. G. Schneider are Archemachos Fr. 
i, from Athenaeus VI. 264 A : BotwrtDj 
T&V Trjv Apvaiav KaTOLK^aavriov ol /JLTJ dir- 
dpavres els ri]v BcHamW, ctXX e/.t</uXoxw- 
prjcravTes irapedwKav eauroi)s rots GerraXots 
dov\eveiv KO.& bfj,o\oyias, e0 $ o#re ea- 
vrovs fK rrjs %c6/)as, cure diroKrevov- 
aurol 5e TTJV -^wpav epya^6fj,evoi ras 
tiTroScucroucrt^ ovroi f.iev ovv ol 
Kara rds 6/uio\oylas Kara/meivavres /cat TTO.- 
padovres eavrovs eK\rj07)aav rore /xe^eVrat, 
vvv oe irev^ffrai : and Theopompos Fr. 
134 in Ath. VI. 265 B, c: Aa/ceScu/xoVtoi 
/cat GerraXot (pavria ovrai KaraaKevaad/mevoi 
rrjv oov\elav eKr<jiv liKKrii>wv rQiv olKovvr&v 
Trporepov rrjv %w/3af, TJV eKetvoi vvv e-%ovo~iv, 
ol Axaiwv, QerraXol 5e HeppaLfiuv /cat 
^layvrjrw /cat Trpoarjyopevffai rovs Kara- 
dov\wdevras ol /m-ev etXwras ot d irevecras. 
On the similar relation between the Mari- 
andynians and the people of Heracleia see 
11. (777) on iv(vn). 6 8. SUSEM. (280) 

Plato compares Helots, Penestae and 
Mariandynians Laws vi 776 c, D. 

38 e<^e8pvovTs] always in wait to 
pounce upon their misfortunes : Thuc. IV. 
80 det yap ra TroXXa Aa/ceSat/xoi tots irpbs 
TOI)S et Xwras rrjs 0i;Xa/c^s irepi yudXtcrra 

II. 9. 5] 1269 a 31 1269 b 13. 281 

3 Tot? aTvyj) /jiaa i BiaTeX^ovcriv) irepl Be TOU? Kp^ra? ovBev 3 

40 7TO) TOIOVTOV (TV/jL/Beprj/cev. aiTiov B tVo)? TO T? 
269 b 7r6Xet9, Kaiirep TroAe/Wcra? d\\ri\ai<$, fji^Be^iav elvai 

Tot? d<j)iCTTafjievois Bid TO fjurj crv/jb^epeiv Kal avTjils (p. 45) 

- TrepiOi/covs, TO?? Be KaKwcnv ol 
e^jdpol TrdvTes rjcrav, Apyeloi Kal Mecr^i/tot Kal 

fcal Tot? eTToA-ot? KaT dp%d$ dcfrlorTavTO Bid TO 
en Tot? 7rpoo-%(iopoi$, A^cttot? Kal Tlepaifiois Kal 
eoiKe Be Kal el fjirjBev eTepov, d\\d TO 76 T^? 4 
epfyooBes elvai, Tiva Bel TT/^O? avTovs 
dvie/jievoi re <ydp v/Spl^ovcri KOL TWV icroov 

10 eavTOvs Tot? Kvplois, Kal KaK07ra0a)S ^"cG^re? e7riftov\evovcn 
Kal fJucrovcrLV. Bf/\ov <S > oui^ co? oi) e^evpicrxovo i TOV /3e\TicrTov 
5 TpoTTOv, ot? TOVTO <TVfji/3aivei Trepl TTJV elXwreiav. eVt Se ?; 5 
vre/ot Ta9 yvvaiKas dveai$ Kal Trpo? T?/^ Trpoaipeonv T^? TTO- 

1269 b 3 7repl off/covs M 8 and apparently F (pracdia circa domus William) || 5 
e<pi<TTo.vTO Bas. 3 in the margin || 6 ireppaipois H 2 Bk. Susem. 1 || 9 CLVCL^VOI. 
Trieber (perhaps rightly) |j 10 KaKoiradovvres P 1 (ist hand, perhaps rightly), yp. 
KaKoirad&s ^wj^res corr. 1 of P 1 in the margin || n <5 > o$v or youi> Susem., o$v 
FII Ar. Bk. I! 12 e rt...i27o a 8 ira\iv~\ Plut. Zj /C . 14 quotes similar statements 
from Aristotle, but, as Heitz (Die verlorenen Schriften des Aristoteles p. 30) rightly 
judges, from his AaKedaifAoviwi HoXtreta 

3 40 al riov 8 iVcos] It might be cherish hatred." 

thought that one very material reason n SirjXov KT\] The truth of this re- 
was the much freer and less oppressed mark no one will wish to question. But 
position which, according to Aristotle s does Aristotle really know of a remedy? 
own evidences 5 19 n. (171), the He hopes to get over the difficulty in his \ 
Cretans granted to their dependants own best state by taking men of non- 
(Oncken). Compare also c. 10 3 n. Hellenic race to till the soil, slaves or 
(355) 5 (357) 8 (364), 16 (3/4). serfs, if possible; failing this, dependent 
SUSEM. (281) freemen of different nations but only of 

1269 b 3 irepiofcovs] See c. 10 3 the gentler races: iv(vn). 10 13, 14, 

and Exc. in. n. (840): cp. iv(vn). 8 8 (815), and n. 

5 rQlsQeTTaXolsldativusincomModi. (364) with Exc. in. Supposing all -this 

d<|)C(rTavTO sc. ot Trei/ecrrat. could be so fortunately arraugedj__would 

4 7 TO Y* T^S iri|xe\eas KT\] "the it have been any real remedy? SUSEM. 

task of attending to this; how, namely, (282) 

we ought to associate with them" the The women of Sparta : 5 12. 

sentence rtva 8el...Tp()Trov being depen- 5 13 r\ irtpl rds Y^vaiKas aveons] 

dent on the noun <:7rt/ie\eas, just as in So Plato speaks Laius I 637 c 5eiKt>vs 

iv(vil). 16. I Tro re XP^I Troie io 6ai TT]V 6/j.i- Trjv TWV yvva.iKwv Trap v/uuv dvcffiv, and 

\lav is dependent on firi/j.eXrjTtoi . We Euripides Androm. 595 o55 av el fiov- 

may render : " It would seem too that Xoiro TLS \ <rw(ppwv ^CVOLTO 2irapTiaTi5ui> 

apart from everything else there is the Kop-rj (Eaton). SUSEM. (283) 

irksome task of seeing that we behave to irpis ri\v irpoap<riv TTJS iroXireCas] 

them as we ought: for when allowed judged by the intention of the constitu- 

their freedom, they grow insolent and tion, 5 the second point of view for criti- 

claim equal rights with their lords: if cism as mentioned in i. The other, the 

treated harshly, they plot revenge and standard of the best constitution, is here 


nOAITIKftN B. 9. 

[II. 9. 5 

Xire/as" /3\a/3epd fcal TT/SO? ev^aifiovlav TroXeo)?. wo-jrep yap (VI) 
15 olfcias jjilpos dvrjp KOI yvvr), 8f)\ov on, /cal TTO\I,V. eyyvs 
TOV Si%a~ SirjprjcrOai Bel vo/mi%i,v et9 re TO rwv dvSp&v TT\TI- 
6o<$ Kal TO TCOV yvvaiKcov, ware ev oaais TroXtretat? 
eyei TO Trepl ra? yvvai/tas, TO THJUCTV Trjs TroXe&J? Bel 
6 eiv elvai dvo{j,o6eT7]Tov. oirep e/cel av/j,/3e{3r)Kev oX^jv yap 
10 TTJV Tr6\iv 6 vo/jioOeTTjs elvat, /3ov\6/jievos KapTepifcrjv, KCLTO, 
TOI)<? dvBpas TotoOro? earlv, eVl Se TGOV yvvaircciov 
o5crt yap a/coXacrroj? TT/OO? aTraaav aK,o\aGiav 
7 /cat Tpvfiepws. ajcrre dvayfcaiov ev Trj ToiavTy TroXtre/a 6 

Tij^aaOai TOV 7r\ovTOV, aXXa>? re /fa^ Tf^axrt yvvaifcotcpa- 
25 Tovfjuevoi, /caOfiTrep Ta TroXXa TCOZ^ (TTpaTLWTiKwv teal vroXe- 
yevwv, e^co KeXrw^ ^ /eaz> el rtz^e? GTepoi 

14 ewo/uiiai> P 4 T b L s Ar. Aid., corr. 1 of P 2 3 and p 1 in the margin (wrongly) [| 
15 [di^^p \ at] Oncken || 16 el s re] wore M 8 and, with ei s re written over it, F 
apparently || 18 5ei vofj-i^etv after 19 e?fat P 1 II 2 Bk. || 11 TOLOUTOS evriv M s P 1 , 
(pavepos ecrTL rotouros ciV II 2 Ar. Bk. perhaps rightly, <f>avepbs etrrt TO&TOV T&XUV Bender 
|j 24<jL Aid. and corr. 1 of P 2 3 , rvx^ 1 - Ka -i- M s || 26 [f] Schneider || 
<pai>epus omitted by T M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added by p 1 in the margin) ; [tpavepus] 
Susem. 1 

called the Wellbeing or Happiness 
fj.ovia) of the state (Congreve). This 
then, and not etivofjiia.v, is the right read 
ing. For the best constitution is pre 
cisely that which most contributes to the 
best life or Happiness. See i i n. 
(128): I. 2 8 ft. (21); and especially in. 
18 i ;/. (683), IY(VII). i i (685), 2 
(687), ii : 2 2, 5 (714), 9 3 f. 
(806), 13 3. SUSKM. (284) 

15 olKCas |Jipos] So I. 3 i, 4 i, 

13 J5-, 

Kal Tro\Lv...vop.i5i.v] "one must regard 
the state as nearly divided into two." 
But the construction is not plain : is it 
eyyvs<ov(rai >Tov dix<z dirjprjo da.L ? This 
would be supported by vi(iv). 6. n, 
vm(v). i. 16, where 67711? is almost an 
adjective. Or it might also be i><.v 
diypTjadai eyyvs TOV 5t^;a < diyp-fja-dai > . 

1 6 From Euclid Eleni. I. 10, I. 9, 
III. 30 it is seen that 5t%a diaipelv = to 
divide into two equal parts. Cp. Nic. 
Eth. v. 4. 8 with Jackson s note. 

17 WCTT tv oorcus KT\] From this it 
is seen, as indeed before from I. 13 16 
nn. (126) (127), that Aristotle intended to 
introduce into his ideal state a public edu 
cation and training for women, although 
this education was certainly not to be 

common to boys and girls. Cp. Introd. 
pp. 49, 52 (2). In the Laws vi 781 R 
Plato had expressed himself still more 
forcibly: ov yap rj/uuav fj.6vov eariv, tus 
86%eiev dv, TO Trepl ras yvvcuKas dKoff/JirjTws 
Trepiopu/JLevov, offy oe ij drj\La rnuv 0L/<ris 
eaTl Trpos dpeTrjv xelpwv Trjs TWV appevuv, 
TOffovTit) 5ta0epet Trpbs TO 7r\e?^ TJ dnrXdaiov 
elvai. Aristotle however says quite the 
same thing Rket. I. 5. 6 1361 a ro ff., 6 crois 
yap TO, /card yvvaiKas (f>av\a wcnrep Aa/ce- 
Sat^uovtots, O"xe56^ /card TO rnju-ffv OVK euSai- 
IIOVOVVLV (quoted by Eaton). SUSEM. 

6 20 Kaprepuofv] of hardy endu 

22 !i;T][i. Xt]Kv] has disregarded his 
aim. This picture of luxurious living is 
indirectly confirmed by Plato Rep. vin. 
548 A, B ; eTridv/ji,7]Tai 8 ye xp^yudroH oi 
TOI.OVTOL are KeKTr)[j.evoi Ta/mte ia /cat oliceiovs 
Kal ad TrepifioXovs ot/CTjcrewi 
veoTTids i Stas, ev als &va\iffKOVTS 
yvvat^l TroAXd dV SairavLpvTo: cp. 550 D. 

7 23 cwo-re dvaYKatov] Wealth 
must needs be in esteem, because the 
unbridled luxury of women is a very 
costly business. SUSEM. (286) 

26 KeXroiv] See Note on the Celtae 
at the end of B. n. SUSEM. (287) 

II. 9. 9] 

1269 b 141269 b 32. 


8 T6Ti/Jii]Kacri rrjv Trpo? roi)? dppevas avvovcr iav . eot/ce yap (VI) 
6 /av0o\oyrf(ra<i vrpwro? OVK d\6yw$ av^ev^ai TOV "Aprjv 
7T/309 rrjv A(f)po$iTr]v rj yap 777309 TT}V rwv dppevcov 6fM\lav 

30 77 Trpo? T/7i> Tft)^ yvvctlK&y fyaivowrai Karafcco^L/jLOt Trdvres 
ol roiovroL. Sio Trapd rot? A.d/ccoa i rou$ V7rrjp%i>, Kal TroXXa 7 

9 8lO)KlTQ V7TO TWV yVVdlKCOV eTTt Trj<> dp^fj^ CLVTWV. 

28 Trpwrws M 8 ? 1 , perhaps rightly | 
M 8 ? 1 

8 28 6 p-vOoXo-y^o-as irpwros] Aris 
totle imagines that myths, like laws and 
customs, iin. (296) (300) on 12, 14, are 
direct inventions of individuals, who 
consciously intended by means of them 
to represent to sense certain ideas and 
thoughts. Cp. also v(vin). 6 13 n. 
1078. SUSEM. (288) 

29 fj -yap KT\] In his assertion, that 
martial races are also the most amorous, 
Aristotle is supported by the views of 
modern anthropologists (Fiilleborn). 
SUSEM. (289) 

30 KaTaKw\i|jioi] easily captivated, 
with inrb v(vill). 7. 4, with IK NIC. Eth. 
x. 9. 3; with Trpos one might say "easily 
allured to." 

31 816 irapd KT\] Schomann Anti 
quities of Greece p. 268 Eng. tr. is cer 
tainly right in saying that the social 
position and influence of women in 
Sparta was not higher than it is amongst 
the modern peoples of the west, and that 
the prevailing condition of things with 
us in this respect would have appeared to 
an Athenian of the best time to be a 
species of feminine rule (ywaiKOKpaTta), 
although it does not at all alienate our 
women from their natural and most 
appropriate calling of housewives and 
mothers. But this does not thoroughly 
answer the question proposed by J. G. 
Schneider (see n. 295 b) and by Oncken: 
whether true womanliness can have thriven 
under so rough a treatment of the marriage 
relation as was customary at Sparta: 
whether a family life and true domesticity 
could be found when the Spartan full- 
citizen was, as a matter of fact, banished 
from the family, lived continually with 
his comrades in arms, ate at the public 
table, slept in a tent, and only paid 
stolen visits to his wife ; where conse 
quently the household was without a 
head, the wife without a home of common 
duty and mutual improvement, where pa 
rental duty was removed and the natural 
field for the wife s activity abolished. If 

P 2 3 Q b Aid. Bk. 


in the latter respect Aristotle mistook 
the cause of the evil (as his retention of 
common messes for the men and his 
excessive public education prove), does 
this justify us in assuming that his de 
scription of the evil itself is wholly in 
correct? In reference to the first question, 
if it was nothing unusual at Sparta to 
hand over one s wife to another, if, as 
Schomann himself thinks, op, c, p. 267, a 
Spartan woman, to whom proposals were 
made by another man, hardly felt herself 
insulted by them but referred the lover to 
her husband, then, (as Fiilleborn and 
Schomann after him have remarked) the 
boast of the Spartans, that adultery was 
never heard of amongst them, does not 
amount to much : adultery here only 
means an intrigue with another man with 
out the husband s permission. The 
further boast of the Spartan women, that 
they were in an especial degree good 
housewives (Schomann op. c. p. 268), 
must accordingly be reduced to its proper 
dimensions. Plato however concedes 
(Laws vn 805 E f.) that though the 
Spartan women did not weave and spin, 
occupations which they left to their 
female slaves, they yet led an active life : 
since they had nearly half the responsi 
bility for the management of the house 
hold and the education of the children. 
Certainly there is some exaggeration in 
the charges of license and love of power 
brought against them, and this must 
be moderated from the above points of 
view : but it is quite as certain that they 
are not all pure inventions. Oncken 
refers his readers to the proof given by 
him Hellas and Athens II. 85. Cp. 
Introd. p. 36 n. (i). SUSEM. (290) 

32 errl TTJS apx^s] during their su 
premacy. Cp. 10 n. (292) : vni(v). 6. 
13 eiri TTJS T&V AXevaduv dpx^s, 7 14 
^TT A.0fjvai(i}V Kal 2\.aKe8aifj.oviojv: and De 
Caelo ill. 2 7, 300 b 30, tiri TTJS $1X0- 
S, during the reign of Love. 



[II. 9. 9 

rl Sia(f)6pei, yvvaifcas ap^eiv rj TOV$ dp^ovras VTTO rwv (VI) 
ap%eo-0ai ; ravro yap crv^flaivei. ro-l^ov 8 ov- (p. 



, flXa/SepcoTarai Kal Trpbs ravO al rcov 
e&ij\(0crav S eVl 7-779 7]f3aiwv 
ev yap ovBev rjcrav, wcrTrep eV eTepais 

06pv/3ov Be 
40 ovv eoiK 

11 VdiKWV 

i 270 a , , 

rot9 l\aKwaiv 6^X070)9 TI TGOV yv- 
yap r^9 olieetas Sta ra9 
TroXzV xpovov, f 7ro\e/jiovvT<; TOV Te 777309 . 

7rd\LV TOV 7TD09 ApKaOCLS Kdi 

Se avTOvs fjizv Trapel^ov TW vo/moOeTr) 

35 eiirep II Bk.; rjirep Sylburg Susem. 1 misled by William s version nisi ad bellum 
|| 36 roC# ] TOVTOV Spengel 

1270 a i T??S OLKeias (ot /ctas ? P Ar.) omitted by M 8 and P 1 (ist hand), added by p 1 
in the margin Ij 4 TrpoydoTre-rroL^/j.^ovs Bk. Susem. 1 by a misprint (corrected by 

ning of the era of the Olympiads, 776 B.C. 
(J, G. Schneider). See this passage 
among the Fragments 490, 1558 a 13, 
Rose = 485 in Rose Aristot. psendep.=-^6 
Miiller. Further compare especially Gil 
bert Stiidicn 72 ff. 158 ff. SUSEM.. (294) 
The passage is as follows : ot fj.ev yap 

e/ceXetptW \tyov<nv O.VTOV, ui> 
<TTI /cat Api(TTOTe\7)s TeK/mrjpiov Trpoafiepuv 
TOV OXu^iTTtacrt dicn<oi> ev w TovvofJ.0. TOV 
AvKovpyov Stacrwferat KaTayeypa/j-iAfrov, 
E. Curtius, History Eng. tr. I. p. 191, 
adopts this date. Even so, there would 
be a grave chronological difficulty if 
these Arcadian wars be supposed to pre 
cede Lycurgus. The first Messenian war 
is dated 743 723 B.C. But as to the 
main fact Aristotle is correct. A long 
period of camp-life, of war in which the 
Spartans lived perpetually in the field, 
must have preceded the complete estab 
lishment of the system and the institu 
tions which are referred to the Lycurgean 
legislation*. Such a period we find in 
the tedious and difficult conquest of La- 
conia by its Dorian invaders. 

4 Trpow8oir-iroLT]fjL vovs] Note the dou-J 
ble formation of perfect. 

* I entirely agree with Wilamowitz Homer- 
ische Untersuchuugen, Berlin 1884, p. 267 ff., that 
Lycurgus is only a mythical person, and that the 
supposed Lycurgean legislation never had an 
existence ; and I also regard the account which 
he gives of the real state of things as altogether 
correct. SUSEM. 

9 35 TWV e-yKvKXiwv] See 

and i. 7 2. SUSEM. (291) 
10 37 iirl TT]S 0T](Bcua>v 

at the time of the Theban nvason 
under Epameinondas 369 B.C. SUSEM. 

38 XP 7 ! "^ 01 KT M "For they were 
of no use, any more than the women in 
other cities, but they caused more con 
fusion than the enemy." It is significant 
that the encomiasts of Sparta, Xenophon 
(Hellen. VI. 5 28 at ntv oude TOV 


idovaac 7ro\efj.iovs) and Plutarch (Ages. 31 
/cat TUV yvvanKuiv ov 5vvafj.evwv r/(ri xdfetj/, 
dXXd TravTa.ira<nv eK(ppovo}i> ovauv irpos re 
TT]v Kpavyrji /cat TO irvp T&V Tro\ep.lwv) 
speak much more strongly on this point. 
Oncken observes quite rightly, that this 
was the first opportunity the Spartan 
women had for putting into practice the 
brave speeches they had been making for 
centuries; they might at least have dis 
played a quiet bearing, even if they were 
not to be taken at their word. SUSEM. (293) 

Bernays renders : although the women 
in other cities are of use [on such occa 
sions]. But is it so? The Septem of 
Aeschylus scarcely bears this out. 

Plato must allude to this, Laws 806 B. 

11 1270 a i ^|o) -yap KrX] Accord 
ing to Plutarch Lycurg. i , in his account 
of the constitution of Sparta Aristotle 
placed Lycurgus apparently no earlier 
than the time of Iphitos, about the begin 

II. 9. 13] 

1269 b 331270 a 11. 


5 7re7ro?7/iteVov? Bid rov arpaTiwriKov (Siov (Tro\\d yap e^et 
7-37? dperf)?), ra? Be yvvai/cds <acrt jjiev ayeiv 


pr)<rai TOP Av/covpyov eTrl roi)? yo/u-of?, &5? 
12 a7ro(TTrjvai TraXiv. curiai {lev ovv elcrLV avrat, TWV yevo/Jie- 9 

i/wi/, ware Bfj\ov on KCLI ravTTjs T^? d/jLaprias dX)C 
10 ou TOVTO aKOTTovfjiev, TIVL Bet 
13 d\\d 7Tpl rov opds Kal fjir 

e^eiv rj fir/ 
TO, Be Trepl ra? 71;- 

7 e-n-l] VTTO ? Koraes || 8 yivofj.i>uv M s P 1 
hand), yp. rov P 4 in the margin 

ii ToO] rd Q b T b and P 4 (ist 

5 iroXXd YO-P ^x t H 16 ? 1 ! KT ^J Cp. 

Plato Laws I. 630 E ou% cos ?r/)6s dper^s TI 
/j.6piov Kal ravra TO (pavXararov eridet [6 
Au/co0/37os] /SX^TTWi , d\\d Trpos iravav ape- 
rrfV. Thuc. I. 84. 3 iro\e/miKoi re /cat 
eu/3ouXot 5td r6 evKOffttov yiyvofJteda. : V. 
66. 4 (Eaton). SUSEM. (294 b) 

6 <j>ao-i] As to whether this is an 
anonymous quotation from Ephoros, or 
an appeal to oral tradition, see Introd. 
P- 35 n - (3)- Cp. also below n. (310) on 
7. SUSEM. (295) 

7 ws 8 dvreKpovov KT\] Precisely so 
Plato Laws VI. 781 A ro 5e Trept rds yvi>a?Kas 
ovda/m&s opdus avofjioderriTov /ut,edelTai...d\\ 
o Kal d XXws 7^ros ^juwi/ r&v dvOpuiruv 
\adpaioTfpov fj,a\\ov Kal eT 

I0y, TO ^Xu, 5td TO dffdeves, OVK 


TOV ov afaid-r). This Plutarch must have for 
gotten, when (Lycurg. 14) he attacks Aris 
totle alone on account of this same remark 
and tries to refute him. The facts which 
he adduces with this object prove simply 
nothing: but directly afterwards (c. 15) 
he gives a detailed account of the Spartan 
custom of lending wives, and this does 
not make the assertion, which he appends 
to it, very credible : viz. Tavra ok OI)TWS 
irpa.TTOiJi.eva <pvfftKuis Kal TTO\ITIK&S TOTC TO- 
cfovTov (xTretxe TTJS vvTepov \eyo- 
/j,^vrjs yevtcrdai Trepl TCIS yvva^Kas 
ev^epelas, wffTe 6 Xws O.TT(.<JTOV elvai TO 
TTJS /Jiotxeias Trap 1 diVoTs. Even he does 
not venture to deny the subsequent laxity 
of the women at Sparta. (J. G. 
Schneider.) SUSEM. (295 b) 

12 8 " These then are the causes 
of the events which happened and there 
fore clearly of this mistake : but the ques 
tion before us i